SITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 
LOS  ANGELES 


1 


HE  HISTORY  OF  APPROPRIATIONS  IN  THE 
LEGISLATIVE  SESSION  OF  1916 
New  York  State 

CONTENTS 

PAGE 

PREFATORY   NOTE iii 

Chapter 

I— GOVERNOR  WHITMAN'S  FINANCIAL  PROGRAM ....         1 

II— THE  RECEPTION  OF  GOVERNOR  WHITMAN'S  FI- 
NANCIAL PROGRAM 7 

III— A  FINANCIAL  CHRONICLE   OF    THE    LEGISLATIVE 

SESSION  OF  1916 19 

IV— THE    APPROPRIATION    ACT    PREPARED     BY    THE 

FINANCE  AND  WAYS  AND  MEANS  COMMITTEES      27 

V— THE  APPROPRIATION  BILL  BEFORE  THE  LEGISLA- 
TURE  FOR  CONSIDERATION 51 

VI  -APPROPRIATION  BILLS  PASSED  BY  THE  LEGISLA- 
TURE NOT  INCLUDED  IN  THE  GENERAL  AP- 
PROPRIATION BILL 76 

VII   -CONCLUSIONS 94 

APPENDIX 

TEXT  OF  THE  DEBATE  ON  THE  APPROPRIATION  BILL 
IN  THE  SENATE 99 


'       '-     ^.' 


•  •  •      •  « 
•  •    •          •    •    » 

•  •  •    •  «    . 


•  *  •  •  •      • 

:  •'  ••  •.  ; :  ; 

.         .  .    ,  ,       . 

•  •  4  •  «      • 

.*.  

,          ,  •  •            •    • 

,           ,  •  •           .       • 

•       .  •  •  •    .    • 

•  •  •  •  •  • 


•  »••         •  • 

•        1      .      •-• 


S3U 


PREFATORY  NOTE 

The  growing  responsibilities  and  the  inevitably  increasing  cost 
of  modern  government  have,  within  recent  times,  given  pause  to 
the  most  optimistic  champions  of  "the  good  old  American  way  of 
doing  things."  When  governments  were  working  with  surpluses 
and  committees  on  ways  and  means  were  embarrassed  with  the 
number  and  variety  of  tax  expedients  open  to  them,  it  per- 
haps mattered  little  how  estimates  were  made  up,  whether  they 
were  critically  reviewed,  or  in  what  manner  the  appropriations 
once  authorized  were  actually  expended.  The  broad  back  of 
America,  as  a  celebrated  financier  once  remarked,  could  bear  it 
all.  Under  such  circumstances  our  men  of  state  could,  without 
much  positive  danger,  be  as  casual  and  uninformed  in  finance  as 
Pitt,  who,  as  Macaulay  declared,  knew  nothing  accurately  except 
Spenser's  Faerie  Queene,  never  applied  himself  steadily  to  any 
branch  of  knowledge,  was  a  wretched  financier,  and  never  became 
famiUar  with  the  rules  of  that  House  of  which  he  was  the  brightest 
ornament. 

But  those  easy  days  are  past.  Deficits,  not  surpluses,  confront 
our  legislative  bodies,  and  signs  are  everywhere  on  the  horizon 
that  citizens  are  alive  to  the  necessity  of  introducing  more  order, 
economy  and  responsibility  into  our  government.  Numerous 
commissions  on  economy  and  efficiency,  the  debates  in  constitu- 
tional conventions,  committees  on  legislative  procedure,  and 
recent  budget  legislation  in  some  of  our  states,  all  bear  witness 
to  the  coming  of  a  new  day  in  American  financial  administration. 
The  "pork  barrel,"  though  large  and  still  iron-bound,  is  becom- 
ing a  by-word  for  something  not  much  above  larceny.  We  are 
really  growing  dissatisfied  with  our  current  fiscal  practices  and 
are  casting  about  for  some  remedy  for  the  evils  which  we  no  longer 
attempt  to  conceal. 

In  this  steadily  advancing  movement  for  a  revolution  in  our 
discredited  financial  methods,  it  seems  fair  to  say,  the  Bureau  of 
Municipal  Research  has  done  its  full  share.  During  the  past 
two  years  it  has  subjected  to  searching  scrutiny  the  finances  of 
several  American  states  and  foreign  countries  and  has  amassed  a 
truly  monumental  collection  of  information  on  the  whole  subject. 
This  material  is  being  put  to  use  in  the  preparation  of  a  number 

ill 


APPROPRIATIONS    IN     LEGISLATURE,     SESSION     OF     1016 

of  descriptive,  critical,  and  constructive  handbooks  on  budgets, 
accounting,  and  reporting.  Naturally,  the  Bureau  has  followed 
with  even  more  than  usual  care  the  course  of  financial  administra- 
tion in  the  state  of  New  York,  and  in  accordance  with  its  fixed 
practice  it  has  sought  at  first  hand  an  accurate  description  of  the 
current  system  as  the  basis  of  critical  or  constructive  suggestions. 

Obviously  one  of  the  first  necessities  of  such  a  survey  is  a  study 
of  the  way  in  which  the  legislature  of  the  state  of  New  York 
formulates  and  passes  bills  carrying  charges  on  the  public  treas- 
ury. The  task  of  making  this  studj^  was  assigned  to  Mr.  Birl  E. 
Shultz,  who  was  equipped  for  the  undertaking  by  two  years  of 
graduate  work  in  politics  and  administration  in  Columbia  Uni- 
versity^ and  by  numerous  assignments  in  the  Bureau  of  Municipal 
Research  to  problems  involving  legislative  procedure  and  meth- 
ods. After  preparing  himself  for  the  task  by  an  examination  of 
the  available  literature  on  the  subject,  Mr.  Shultz  went  to  Albany 
and  day  after  day  watched  the  proceedings  of  the  legislature 
from  the  lobbies  and  galleries  (and  from  the  floor  on  some  occa- 
sions), observing  closely  the  actual  process  of  appropriating 
public  money  so  far  as  that  was  visible  to  anyone  not  a  member 
of  the  legislature  itself.  In  addition  to  his  personal  observations, 
he  secured  all  of  the  records  including  a  stenographic  report  of 
the  debate  in  the  senate  on  the  general  appropriation  bill. 

The  result  of  Mr.  Shultz's  labors  is  the  following  descriptive 
report.  Its  value  for  students  of  government,  members  of  legis- 
latures, citizens,  and  public  officers  is  so  apparent  that  it  calls  for 
little  comment  by  way  of  preface.  It  presents,  for  the  first  time, 
so  far  as  I  know,  a  full  and  rather  detailed  account  of  the  appro- 
priation methods  of  an  actual  legislative  session,  written  by  a 
student  whose  fundamental  interest  is  scientific  in  character — a 
desire  to  know  wie  es  eigentlich  gewesen  ist.  The  report  presents 
in  a  dispassionate  manner  the  story  of  the  controversy  between 
the  legislature  and  Governor  Whitman  which  forms  an  illuminat- 
ing chapter  in  the  history  of  American  financial  methods.  All 
of  the  bills  calling  for  the  direct  appropriation  of  money  were 
sifted  out  and  arranged  in  order,  and,  on  pages  14-18,  they  are 
set  forth  so  that  the  student  may  see  just  the  nature  of  the  grist 
which  the  legislature  had  to  grind.  The  grand  appropriation  bill 
is  traced  step  by  step  through  the  legislature,  and  on  the  basis 
of  "stop-watch"  observations,  Mr.  Shultz  shows  just  how  much 
"solemn  deliberation"  it  received  at  the  hands  of  the  people's 
representatives.     The  conclusions  speak  for  themselves. 

iv 


PREFATORY    NOTE 


While  it  is  hardly  to  be  expected  that  Mr,  Shultz  has  escaped 
the  pitfalls  and  possibilities  of  error  that  He  on  every  side  of  the 
most  careful  and  faithful  student  and  while  his  essay  bears  some 
of  the  marks  of  the  necessary  haste  under  which  it  was  prepared, 
I  feel  safe  in  saying  that  it  is  a  positive  contribution  to  our  con- 
crete knowledge  of  American  government.  Much  that  he 
relates  has  long  been  known  "in  a  general  way,"  but  he  has 
brought  generality  to  earth.  Those  who  in  the  future  have 
occasion  to  speak  of  legislative  methods  can  now  speak  by  the 
book.  It  is  to  be  hoped  that  the  volume  will  meet  at  the  hands 
of  those  citizens  who  desire  to  be  informed  about  current  practices 
that  reception  which  it  truly  merits. 


CHARLES   A.   BEARD. 


Training  School  for  Public  Service, 
New  York  City,  June  8,  1916. 


CHAPTER  I 
GOVERNOR   WHITMAN'S    FINANCIAL    PROGRAM 


At  the  opening  of  the  annual  session  of  the  New  York  legisla- 
ture on  January  5,  1916,  Governor  Whitman  laid  before  that 
body  an  elaborate  "tentative  budget  proposal"  and  a  brief  con- 
spectus of  the  previous  year's  appropriations  and  current  depart- 
mental requests,  supplemented  by  executive  recommendations 
as  to  expenditures  and  a  large  volume  of  supporting  data.  In 
order  that  proper  emphasis  might  be  given  to  state  finances, 
the  governor  gave  special  importance  to  his  program  by  devoting 
a  considerable  portion  of  his  regular  message  to  a  discussion 
of  it. 

The  Preparation  of  Governor  Whitman's  Budget  Proposal 

By  way  of  preparation  for  his  action,  Mr.  Whitman  had,  as 
early  as  November  5,  1915,  appointed  two  budget  advisors, 
Mr.  Charles  S.  Hervey  and  Mr.  Winfred  B.  Holton,  Jr.,  to  collect 
estimates  for  appropriations  from  heads  of  departments,  bureaus, 
institutions,  offices,  etc.,  under  executive  direction.^  These 
gentlemen  proceeded  to  hold  a  series  of  open  conferences  with 
department  heads  and  other  officers  having  occasion  to  request 
appropriations  from  the  treasury  of  the  state.  For  example,  on 
November  15  the  proposed  appropriations  for  the  department 
of  agriculture  were  taken  up  in  conference,  the  governor,  the 
budget  advisors,  two  members  of  the  legislature,  and  the 
commissioner  being  present.-  To  these  conferences  unusual 
publicity  was  given  by  the  daily  newspapers. 

After  the  series  of  public  hearings  on  departmental  require- 
ments, and  the  collection  of  additional  information  as  to  the 
actual  needs  of  the  several  branches  of  the  state  government, 
the  governor's  budget  advisors  came  to  conclusions  on  the 
adequacy  or  inadequacy  of  the  several  requests  and  in- 
corporated their  findings  in  the  form  of  a  "tentative  budget 


1  New  York  Sun,  November  5,  1915. 

2  Albany  Knickerbocker  Press,  November  16,  1915. 


APPROPRIATIONS    IN    LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 

proposal.  "^  They  re\aewed  the  departmental  estimates  and  rec- 
ommended to  the  governor  decreases  in  some  of  the  requests  and 
increases  in  others.  They  received  from  the  comptroller  of  the 
state  the  estimates  of  the  legislative  and  judicial  branches  of  the 
government  and,  having  arranged  these  items  in  the  standard 
form  decided  upon,  they  included  them  in  the  consoHdated 
proposal  without  change  in  the  sums  called  for. 

The  General  Form  of  Governor  Whitmaji^s  Budget  Proposal 

The  amounts  immediately  necessary  to  meet  deficiencies,  com- 
monly known  as  the  "supply  bill,"  were  not  set  forth  in  a  separate 
measure.  Likewise  the  amounts  to  be  appropriated  for  repairs, 
construction  or  permanent  betterments  were  not  embodied  in 
an  independent  proposal.  No  bills  of  this  character  were  pre- 
pared, but  all  charges  on  the  treasurj-,  special  and  general,  were 
included  in  the  schedules  of  the  respective  departments,  bureaus, 
institutions,  etc.,  and  brought  together  in  one  general  appropria- 
tion bill.  This  was  done  in  order  that  the  entire  financial  record 
of  each  institution's  needs  might  be  exhibited  at  one  place  in  the 
bill  for  consideration  at  one  time.^ 


1  Speaking  of  this  operation  the  governor  said  in  his  message:  "I  asked  the 
representatives  of  the  finance  committees  of  the  legislature  in  October  last  to 
join  with  me  in  a  budget  conference.  This  conference  has  held  almost  con- 
tinuous public  hearings  for  two  months,  and  representatives  of  nearly  all  the 
departments  of  the  state  government  except  the  legislature,  judiciary  and 
elected  officers  have  been  called  before  it.  In  addition  to  working  out  a  budget 
form  for  recommendation  to  the  legislature,  the  conference  has  arrived  at  tenta- 
tive appropriation  figures  for  the  departments  which  have  been  examined." 

^In  a  speech  delivered  before  The  Real  Estate  Board  of  New  York,  on  Febru- 
ary 5,  1916,  Governor  Whitman  made  the  following  appraisal  of  his  own 
budget  proposal:  "All  the  sound  principles  which  should  underlie  appropria- 
tions I  feel  sure  can  be  enforced  under  this  plan.  These  principles  are:  First, 
That  in  the  process  of  making  appropriations  full  information  should  be  avail- 
able as  to  the  needs  for  the  allowances  to  be  made  and  that  the  allowances 
themselves  should  be  acts  performed  in  public;  that  there  should  be  no  star 
chamber  proceedings  nor  secret  log  rollings  as  a  condition  precedent  to  appro- 
priations. Second,  That  all  appropriations  of  public  money  should  be  made 
in  such  terms  that  the  public  may  clearly  understand  the  exact  uses  to  be 
made  of  the  moneys  allowed  and  that  those  terms  .shall  automatically  enforce 
their  use  for  those  purposes.  Third,  That  all  the  appropriations  for  all 
activities  of  the  state  should  be  made  at  one  time  and  in  one  document,  so  that 
on  the  one  hand  the  appropriation  allowances  for  all  departments  as  a  total 
may  be  regulated  within  the  power  of  the  State  to  pay,  and  on  the  other  hand 
that  no  activity  should  be  granted  allowances  out  of  proportion  to  its  im- 
portance at  the  expense  of  other  activities  of  the  State.  Fourth,  That  once 
the  appropriations  are  made  they  should  be  so  restricted  that  the  annual  rate 
of  government  expense  cannot  at  any  time  during  the  year  be  increased  above 
the  level  fi.xed  at  the  time  of  the  appropriation.  Fifth,  That  the  form  in 
which  the  appropriations  are  made  shall  be  so  clear  and  definite  that  the 
financial  officer  of  the  State  shall  be  able  to  control  the  expenditures  of  those  ap- 
propriations in  exact  accordance  with  the  intention  of  the  Legislature  which 
made  the  appropriations,  and  the  Executive  who  approved  them." 


WHIT^IA^•S     FINANCIAL    PROGRAM 


While  thus  consohdating  proposed  expenditures,  the  governor's 
tentative  budget  classified  the  estimates  for  each  grand  division 
of  the  state  work  in  schedules  under  the  following  titles: 

1.  Personal  service 

2.  Maintenance  and  operation  other  than  personal  service 

3.  Repairs  and  construction  or  permanent  betterments. 

The  combined  amounts  proposed  under  these  titles  made  up 
the  total  appropriation  for  the  grand  divison  of  state  work  in 
question.^ 

A  "work  program"  was  also  included  in  each  division  of  the 
tentative  budget.  This  program  was  an  analytical,  itemized 
statement  setting  forth  in  most  minute  detail  how  the  money  was 
to  be  spent,  and  such  items  were  to  become  fixed  appropriations 
unless  the  governor  by  an  executive  order  honored  requests  for 
transfers  from  one  item  to  another  under  the  schedule  in  question. 
The  executive  order  authorizing  such  transfer  was  subject  to 
certain  limitations.- 

The  exact  departures  made  by  Governor's  Whitman's  tentative 
budget  proposal  are  seen  best  in  the  form  of  a  contrast  with  an 
appropriation  bill  for  the  previous  year.  This  contrast  is  pre- 
sented below,^  but  it  may  be  said  here  that  the  plan  offered 
five  distinct  features  which  were  deemed  advances  over  former 
practices: 

1 — It  brought  all  appropriations  for  each  institution  or  de- 
partment together  in  one  bill,  at  the  same  place  in  that 
bill,  and  under  one  heading  in  that  bill 

2 — It  provided  for  a  separate  "lump  sum"  personal-service 
appropriation,  instead  of  including  it  as  formerly  in  the 
appropriation  for  maintenance 

3 — It  provided  a  detailed  itemization  of  each  of  the  ap- 
propriations under  the  schedules  for  personal  service, 
maintenance  other  than  personal  service,  repairs  and  con- 
struction 

4 — It  provided  for  executive  supervision  and  control  of 
administration  by  making  it  incumbent  upon  the  institu- 
tion or  department,  before  transferring  any  of  the  amounts 
in  the  detailed  itemization  under  a  schedule,  to  obtain  the 
authorization  to  do  so  from  the  governor 

5 — It  abolished  the  supply  bill  by  including  a  statement  of 

1  See  below,  p.  31,  for  an  illustrative  section  from  Governor  Whitman's  bill. 

2  Set  forth  below,  p.  29. 
^  See  pages  30-36. 


APPROPRIATIONS     IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 

amounts  to  be  immediately  available,  if  necessary,  in  the 
statement  of  the  total  amount  appropriated  under  each 
schedule.^ 

Governor  Whitman's  Additional  Recommendation 

In  addition  to  supporting  vigorously  his  "tentative  budget 
proposal,"  Mr.  Whitman  also  included  in  his  message  a  recom- 
mendation that  a  constitutional  amendment  should  be  adopted 
conferring  upon  the  governor  the  right  to  reduce,  as  well  as  to 
veto  items  in  appropriation  bills.  He  did  this  on  the  ground  that 
the  existing  constitutional  provisions  seriously  interfered  with 
the  preparation  by  the  legislature  of  a  state  budget  in  proper  form 
for  subsequent  consideration  by  the  executive.- 

The  constitutional  amendment  recommended  by  Governor 
Whitman  was  introduced  in  the  Senate  on  January  28  by  Mr. 
Argetsinger  and  referred  to  the  finance  committee.  The  pur- 
pose of  the  resolution,  as  stated  in  the  title,  was  to  change  the 
constitution  by 

**an  amendment  to  Section  9  of  Article  4  of  the  constitution, 
in  relation  to  the  power  of  the  governor  to  reduce  the  appro- 
priations in  legislative  bills  before  him  for  consideration." 

Under  the  present  constitution,  the  governor  has  the  power  to 
veto  separate  items  of  an  appropriation  bill.  Mr.  Whitman's 
proposed  amendment  sought  to  confer  on  the  chief  executive  of 
the  state  an  additional  right  or  alternative,  namely,  the  right  to 
reduce  one  or  more  of  the  several  items  of  an  appropria- 
tion bill.     It  also  provided  that  the  governor    might    reduce 

1  The  advantages  which,  in  his  opinion,  were  offered  by  his  proposals  were 
explained  at  length  by  the  governor  in  his  message  to  the  legislature.  Chief 
among  these  were  six:  first,  that  all  appropriations  or  reappropriations  for  a 
fiscal  year  were  embraced  within  one  appropriation  bill,  excepting,  of  course, 
jn  cases  of  emergency :  second,  that  by  making  a  complete  and  informative  pres- 
entation of  all  fiscal  needs  of  the  state  in  one  document,  a  proper  proportion 
or  balance  among  the  various  state  activities  could  be  maintained;  third,  that 
by  presenting  the  appropriations  for  each  activity  in  one  item  or  group  of  items 
they  could  readily  be  the  subject  of  one  legislative  consideration;  fourth,  that 
by  separating  maintenance  from  personal-service  costs  a  basis  was  laid  for  a 
more  mtelligent  comparison  of  expenditures:  and  fifth,  that  the  system  of 
transfers  within  schedules  on  executive  order,  subject  to  the  limitations  above 
noted,  would  make  workable  a  highly  itemized  program  of  expenditure;  and 
Bixth,  that  this  form  of  ajjpropriation  enabled  the  legislature  to  express  its 
administrative  policy  in  the  terms  of  exact  appropriations. 

^  Among  the  other  financial  recommendations  were  the  change  of  the  fiscal 
year  from  October  1  to  July  1  and  the  placing  of  future  borrowing  "upon  a 
modern  and  sound  financial  basis,  either  through  the  issue  of  serial  bonds  or 
through  the  application  of  actuarial  methods  to  the  regulation  of  sinking  fund 
contributions." 


WHITMAN'S     FINANCIAL    PROGRAM 


the  amount  of  an  appropriation  if  a  bill  were  so  presented 
as  to  contain  but  one  item  of  appropriation.  It  further 
stipulated  that  if  the  legislature  was  in  session  at  the  time  of  the 
exercise  of  the  veto  or  reducing  power,  the  governor  should  trans- 
mit to  that  body  a  statement  of  the  items  objected  to  or  reduced, 
and  that  the  legislature  could  reconsider  such  items  separately. 
If  on  such  reconsideration  the  legislature  should  repass  by  a  two- 
thirds  vote  any  item  vetoed  or  reduced  by  the  governor,  the  same 
should  become  a  law  notwithstanding  his  objection. 

Objections  to  the  Proposed  Constitutional  Amendment 

This  amendment  was  not  reported  to  the  senate  by  the  finance 
committee.  It  was  contended  by  some  opponents  that  the  pro- 
posal was  not  in  any  particular  a  necessary  part  of  proper  budget 
procedure.  It  was  also  maintained  by  some  that  it  opened  the 
way  for  executive  usurpation  of  legitimate  legislative  prerogatives. 
Giving  the  governor  the  power  to  revise  the  decisions  of  the  legis- 
lature by  reducing  such  items  as  he  deemed  proper  was  obviously 
quite  a  different  thing  from  conferring  on  him  the  power  to  submit 
a  plan  of  an  appropriation  bill  at  the  beginning  of  the  legislative 
session.  If  the  governor  could  reduce  items  he  could  determine 
the  appropriations  of  the  state  in  detail.  He  could  reduce  the 
amounts  appropriated  for  the  legislative  and  judicial  branches 
of  the  government  to  such  an  extent  as  to  hamper  very  seriously 
the  legitimate  activities  of  the  co-ordinate  branches  of  the  state 
government. 

It  is  true  that  the  suggested  amendment  did  provide  that  the 
legislature  might  reconsider  items  reduced  or  eliminated  by  the 
governor  and  restore  them  to  their  original  amounts  by  a  two- 
thirds  vote  in  each  house.  But  as  a  matter  of  common  knowledge, 
most  appropriations  are  included  in  the  bills  passed  either  on  the 
last  day  of  the  session  or  at  least  a  few  days  before  adjournment. 
Under  such  circumstances,  the  legislature  would  be  given  no 
opportunity  to  review  the  governor's  action.  Of  course,  it  might 
be  said  that  the  legislature  could  readily  abandon  its  present 
practices  and  pass  all  appropriation  measures  more  than  ten  days 
before  adjournment.  The  proposed  amendment  did  not  provide 
for  any  such  rule  of  action,  and  if  it  had  done  so  it  would  have 
been  open  to  grave  objections  on  that  score.  It  was  not  difficult 
to  foresee  that  the  actual  practice  under  the  contemplated  amend- 
ment would  amount  to  an  abandonment  of  all  legislative  review 
of  the  governor's  final  decisions  on  appropriations  and  to  the 

5 


APPROPRIATIONS    IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 


adoption  of  executive  discretion  as  the  rule  of  authority  in  a  large 
portion  of  the  measures  carrying  charges  on  the  public  treasury. 

Very  emphatic  objections  to  Governor  Whitman's  proposal 
were  entertained  by  those  who  stressed  the  importance  of  public- 
ity and  citizen  interest  as  features  of  a  sound  budgetary  practice. 
Such  opponents  pointed  out  that  there  was  no  provision  in  the 
amendment  for  public  hearings  on  reductions  by  the  governor; 
that  the  measure  would  add  one  more  "dark  room"  procedure 
to  the  present  secret  sessions  of  the  finance  and  ways  and  means 
committees;  that  it  was  in  flat  contradiction  to  the  idea  of  re- 
sponsibility in  matters  of  finance;  that  while  permitting  the 
governor  to  cut  and  carve  the  appropriation  bills  at  will,  it  im- 
posed no  duties  upon  him  in  the  preparation  of  a  budget;  and 
that  it  called  for  no  open  public  consideration  of  finance  bills  in 
the  committee  of  the  whole  with  the  governor  or  his  representa- 
tives present  to  explain  and  answer  questions. 

It  is  not  surprising,  therefore,  that  Mr,  Whitman's  proposal  to 
confer  upon  the  governor  the  power  to  reduce  as  well  as  to  veto 
items  did  not  come  out  of  the  committee  to  which  it  was  referred. 
Attacked  on  the  one  hand  by  those  jealous  of  legislative  preroga- 
tives and  on  the  other  by  those  advocates  of  the  executive  budget 
v.ho  demand  executive  responsibility  commensurate  with  the 
executive  power,  the  death  of  the  measure  called  forth  few,  if  any, 
regrets. 


CHAPTER   II 

THE    RECEPTION    OF     GOVERNOR    WHITMAN'S 
FINANCIAL   PROGRAM 


The  preparation  of  Governor  Whitman's  "tentative  budget 
proposal"  was  hardly  under  way  in  November  before  signs  of 
an  impending  controversy  with  the  legislature  appeared.  The 
Albany  Knickerbocker  Press,  on  November  6,  stated  that  the 
Republican  members  of  the  senate  and  assembly  looked  for  a 
clash  between  the  governor  and  the  legislative  leaders  on  the 
introduction  of  his  "unofficial  budget."  It  was  objected  that 
the  governor  had  not  consulted  the  experts  of  the  state  comp- 
troller's office,  nor  the  leading  members  of  the  finance  committee 
of  the  senate  and  the  ways  and  means  committee  of  the  assembly, 
that  he  was  usurping  the  rights  of  legislative  committees  in  at- 
tempting to  make  up  a  budget,  and  that  the  submission  of  a 
separate  program  of  appropriations  in  addition  to  that  prepared 
by  the  committees  would  only  introduce  confusion.  Some  mem- 
bers of  the  legislature  were  reported  as  opposed  to  the  plan  on 
the  ground  that  it  was  "unfair  for  the  executive  to  assume  the 
initiative  in  the  making  of  a  budget  as  long  as  he  must,  under  the 
law,  exercise  the  veto  of  items  in  that  budget."  The  newspaper 
headlines  on  January  3  confirmed  the  earlier  impression  that 
some  members  of  the  legislature  were  readj^  for  a  battle  with  the 
governor.^ 

The  New  York  City  Press  and  the  Governor's  Tentative  Budget 

The  reception  accorded  to  Governor  Whitman's  financial 
program  by  the  New  York  City  press  was  on  the  whole  favorable. 
The  Sun  on  January  8  remarked  editorially:  "The  legislature 
should  adopt  the  budget  system  which  ordinary  prudence,  com- 
mon intelligence,  and  Governor  Whitman — may  he  ever  be  in 
such  admirable  society — urge  upon  it.  The  present  practice, 
under  which  nobody  knows  what  has  been  appropriated,  will  then 

1  The  headlines  of  the  New  York  Tribune  on  January  3  ran:  "Rival 
Budgets  Ready  to  Clash;  Whitman  and  Sage  Plans  Will  Fight  It  Out  in  the 
Legislature." 


APPROPRIATIONS    IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 


become  a  memory.  .  .  .  We  trust  that  the  budget  system 
may  be  adopted  by  the  state,  whose  mediaeval  methods  cost 
hundreds  of  thousands  of  dollars  a  year."  The  Evening  Post 
was  even  more  generous  in  its  commentary.  It  said:  "The 
whole  matter  is  presented  by  the  governor  with  great  directness 
and  force.  It  is  a  delight  to  see  an  executive  grapple  so  resolutely 
with  so  difficult  a  problem.  The  solution,  however,  will  not  be 
got  without  a  hard  fight.  Mr.  Whitman  will  have  to  go  against 
not  merely  indifference  and  inertia,  but  prejudice  and  strong 
political  opposition.  All  the  more  is  it  to  his  credit,  say  we,  that 
the  governor  of  the  greatest  business  state  is  girding  himself  to 
put  the  conduct  of  the  public  affairs  on  a  business  basis.  "^ 

The  objection  urged  in  some  quarters  to  the  effect  that  the 
executive  budget  amounted  to  an  usurpation  of  legislative  powers 
was  dwelt  upon  with  special  emphasis  by  the  New  York  Times.^ 
It  said  editorially  that  good  and  sufficient  answer  was  to  be 
found  in  the  fact  that  the  legislature  would  still  have  plenary 
power  over  the  governor's  plan.  It  also  warned  the  legislature 
that  any  budget  prepared  by  itself  would  have  to  present  positive 
merits  and  could  not  secure  approval  merely  as  a  scheme  to 
baffle  the  governor.  Its  criticism  of  legislative  methods  and  its 
approval  of  the  governor's  position  were  positive:  "The  legisla- 
ture appropriates  as  blindly  as  it,  the  state,  spends.  The  system 
is  indefensible  and  intolerable.  It  is  a  growth,  having  become 
by  imperceptible  degrees  what  it  would  be  impossible  to  propose 
anew  outside  of  a  lunatic  asylum.  The  governor  is  fortunate 
in  being  first  in  the  field  with  his  reforms  and  he  will  be  doubly 
fortunate  if  they  become  associated  with  his  name." 

The  news  columns  of  the  papers  in  their  reports  from  Albany 
indicated  that,  from  a  political  point  of  view,  the  governor's 
'budget  proposal  was  regarded  as  a  challenge  to  the  legislature 
and  that  the  governor  was  prepared  to  assume  leadership  in 
bringing  order  out  of  the  chaos  in  state  finances.  The  headline 
in  the  New  York  Tribune  for  January  6,  ran  as  follows:  "Whit- 
man Opens  Fight  for  State  Finance  Reform."  The  headlines  in 
the  other  New  York  City  papers  were  in  the  same  tone.  It 
seemed  clear  that  the  governor  had  decided  to  force  the  issue. 
Indeed  a  very  firm  note  ran  through  the  publicity  materials  sent 
out  by  his  secretary  to  the  newspapers  in  support  of  his  message 


>  New  York  Evening  Post,  January  5,  1916. 

2  January  6, 1916.      See  also  the  Brooklyn  Standard  Union  and  the  Brooklyn 
Times  of  January  5,  1916. 

8 


RECEPTION     OF    GOVERNOR'S     PROGRAM 


and  budget  proposal.  Whether  the  newspapers  gathered  their 
impressions  from  these  materials  or  placed  their  own  interpreta- 
tion on  the  impending  contest  between  the  governor  and  the 
legislature,  is,  of  course,  a  matter  of  conjecture.^ 

Legislative  Leaders  and  the  Budget  Proposal 

The  general  approval  by  the  press  of  Governor  Whitman's 
tentative  budget  did  not  find  a  positive  echo  in  the  legislature. 
The  first  opinions  of  legislative  leaders  were  guarded.  Senator 
Elon  R.  Brown  was  reported  on  January  5,  as  saying:  "On  the 
whole,  I  think  the  governor's  message  is  admirable  and  I  believe 
it  will  meet  with  widespread  approbation.  Some  details  of  his 
financial  plan,  however,  may  not  meet  with  favor.  They  will 
have  to  be  discussed  very  thoroughly."-  The  newspaper  report 
from  which  this  statement  is  taken  went  on  to  indicate  that  the 
executive  budget  plan  would  undoubtedly  meet  with  the  most 
vigorous  opposition  from  the  "Brown-Sage-Walters  Group," 
which  wielded  such  great  power  in  the  senate.  According  to 
this  report  also,  it  was  very  clear  in  the  minds  of  the  legislators 
that  a  positive  issue  over  an  executive  or  legislative  budget  had 
been  raised  and  would  have  to  be  considered. 

From  this  guarded  and  tentative  approval  of  the  governor's 
plan,  members  of  the  legislature  moved  steadily  in  the  direction 
of  open  and  avowed  hostility.  Indeed,  the  New  York  World  of 
January  6,  headed  its  report  from  Albany  with  the  lines  "Senate 
Prepares  to  Fight  Whitman  on  Budget  Reform ;  Machine  Repub- 
lican Leaders  resent  Message  Recommendation  as  Taking  from 
the  Legislature  Power  of  Originating  Financial  Bills;  Assembly 
behind  the  Governor."  Four  days  later  it  became  evident  that 
if  there  had  been  any  confusion  in  the  minds  of  the  members  of 
the  legislature  as  to  the  proper  treatment  to  be  meted  out  to 
Governor  Whitman's  budget  it  was  all  cleared  away.  The  staff 
correspondent  of  the  New  York  Tribune  in  a  despatch  of  January 
9  presented  the  opinions  of  the  Republican  leaders  in  the  follow- 
ing language:  "We  are  obliged  to  Governor  Whitman  for  his 
budget  suggestions,  and  we  may  avail  ourselves  of  some  of  them, 
but  the  constitution  gives  the  legislature  the  right  to  fix  appro- 
priations, and  we  do  not  intend  to  give  up  that  right  to  the 

1  The  Evening  Mail,  January  5:  "Whitman  Urges  Fiscal  Reforms  in  His 
Message."  The  Sun,  January  6:  "Whitman  Asks  Legislature  for  a  New 
Budget  System."  Brooklyn  Citizen,  January  5:  "Whitman  Urges  Central 
Control  of  State  Finances." 

2  New  York  Evening  Post,  January  6,  1916. 

9 


APPROPRIATIONS     IX     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 

governor."^  This  was  represented  as  tantamount  to  saying 
that  while  the  Republican  leaders  did  not  openly  reject  the  gover- 
nor's recommendation  they  would  prepare  their  own  bill,  adopting 
such  of  the  governor's  suggestions  in  detail  as  were  acceptable. 
In  a  few  days  the  staff  correspondent  of  the  Tribune  stated  in 
authoritative  language  that  "Governor  Whitman's  plan  for  a 
state  budget  has  been  rejected  by  the  Republican  leaders  of  the 
senate;  instead  the  senate  leaders  plan  to  pass  the  appropriation 
bills  in  the  same  old  way,  but  with  unanimity  of  action  that  will 
allow  the  governor  to  have  all  of  the  bills  before  him  at  one  and 
the  same  time."  ^ 

Mr.   Whitman's  Attitude  Toward  His  Own  Budget  Bill 

The  attitude  of  the  governor  was  somewhat  uncertain.  Ac- 
cording to  some  accounts  he  seemed  prepared  to  fight  for  his 
budget  bill.  On  January  9,  he  was  represented  as  saying  that 
he  would  not  tolerate  any  trifling  with  it;  that  while  he  did  not 
object  to  reductions,  he  would  under  no  circumstances  agree  to 
increases,  and  that  he  was  determined  to  pass  his  bill  at  any  cost.^ 
A  week  later  newspaper  reports  stated  that  men  on  intimate 
terms  with  the  executive  declared  that  he  was  going  to  fight 
for  the  budget  bill  to  the  limit,  and  that  he  had  no  objections  to 
reductions  being  made,  but  ''under  no  circumstances  would  he 
consent  to  increases."^ 

In  these  reports  it  appeared  that  the  governor  had  come  to  a 
clear  decision  in  his  own  mind  that  a  principle  was  at  stake  and 
that  it  was  his  bounden  duty  to  make  a  fight  for  the  system  of 
economy  which  was  offered  by  an  executive  budget  as  contrasted 
with  the  chaos  and  wastefulness  which  resulted  from  the  present 
legislative  action. ^  But  there  were  at  the  same  time  other  re- 
ports to  the  effect  that  his  views  were  not  so  decided;  in  fact,  on 
January  5,  he  was  reported  as  saying,  "My  budget  is  just  a  ten- 
tative one;  the  legislature  may  do  with  it  what  it  sees  fit."^ 

That  this  really  represented  the  most  mature  view  of  the 
governor  seems  to  be  demonstrated  conclusively  by  his  letter 
written  to  Dr.  Frederick  A.  Cleveland  of  the  Bureau  of  Municipal 


1  New  York  Tribune,  January  10,  1916. 

2  Ibid.,  January  17,  191G. 

3  Ibid.,  January  10,  1916. 
^  Ibid.,  January  17,  1916. 

'See  Mr.  Henry  L.  Stimson's  endorsement  of  the  governor's  budget  plan, 
New  York  Evcnin<i  Post,  January  8,  1916. 
«  New  York  World,  January  6. 

10 


RECEPTION    OF    GOVERNOR'S    PROGRAM 


Research  on  January  19.^  In  this  Mr.  Whitman  said  in  effect 
that  he  did  not  regard  it  as  coming  within  his  constitutional 
prerogative  for  him  to  take  the  leadership  in  budget  matters  and 
that  all  that  he  had  done  or  intended  to  do  was  to  present  a 
tentative  collection  of  estimates  to  the  legislature  without  giving 
to  them  any  more  moral  or  political  weight,  apparently,  than 
that  enjoyed  by  the  estimates  submitted  by  the  comptroller 
under  the  law  of  1909.  Mr.  Whitman's  letter  was  interpreted 
by  the  newspapers  as  a  withdrawal  from  the  position  which  he 
had  taken  at  the  opening  of  the  legislative  session;  indeed,  one 
newspaper  headed  its  report  of  the  affair  with  the  words  "Whit- 
man Quits  Fight  for  Executive  Drawn  Budget.  "^ 

From  that  time  forward  all  the  reports  tended  to  confirm  the 
opinion  that  the  idea  of  executive  leadership  in  budget  drawing 
had  received  a  death  blow,  and  that  the  fate  of  the  governor's 
original  proposals  was  sealed.  The  action  of  the  finance  com- 
mittee of  the  senate  in  sending  the  governor's  budget  bill  to  the 
comptroller  for  revision  was  regarded  as  a  deliberate  attempt  to 
"snub"  Mr.  Whitman  because  in  preparing  the  budget  he  had 
not  originally  taken  into  his  confidence  the  experts  in  the  comp- 
troller's office.^  A  few  days  later  the  Herald  reported  that  Sena- 
tor Sage  had  given  out  "formal  notice  to  Governor  Whitman 
that  the  main  features  of  the  administration's  financial  bills  are 
to  be  discarded  forthwith  .  .  .  as  we  have  found  the  budget 
unworkable.  "^  On  the  same  day  the  New  York  Times  announced 
that  the  legislators  had  doomed  the  executive  budget  and  the 
American  declared  that  the  governor  had  abandoned  all  hope  of 
budget  reform. 

The  Term  "Budget"  of  Political  Value 

It  would  be  far  from  the  truth,  however,  to  say  that  all  of  the 
agitation  caused  by  the  governor's  original  stand  on  the  budget 
proposal  was  lost.  Indeed,  while  giving  the  impression  of 
rejecting  the  governor 'is  budget,  the  leaders  of  the  legislature 
recognized  the  political  value  of  the  term  "budget,"  seized  upon 
it,  and  made  it  their  own.  Senator  Sage,  chairman  of  the  finance 
committee  of  the  senate,  was  careful  to  announce  on  February 
27  that  he  would  not  permit  the  usual  "hasty  action  on  appro- 


1  Municipal  Research,  No.  69,  page  79. 

2  Amsterdam  Sentinel,  January  22,  1916. 

3  New  York  Tribune,  February  9,  1916. 

4  New  York  Herald,  February  24,  1916. 

2  11 


APPROPRIATIONS    IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 

priation  bills  in  the  closing  moments  of  the  senate  but  would  give 
ample  time  for  discussion  and  publicity — one  of  the  essential 
elements  in  sound  budget  procedure."^  From  that  time  forward 
the  legislative  leaders  consistently  confirmed  the  impression  that 
they  favored  the  economy  in  the  system  of  state  finances  imphed 
in  the  term  "budget"  and  that  the}^  were  prepared  to  abandon 
the  old  practice  of  rushing  through  a  large  number  of  appropria- 
tion bills  without  furnishing  sufficient  opportunity  for  mature 
deliberation  in  the  legislature.-  The  impression  was  also  con- 
veyed to  the  public  that  the  legislature  was  anxious  to  abandon 
the  legislative  methods  which  had  so  long  obtained  in  the  state, 
and  to  "improve  upon"  the  system  of  economy  offered  in  the 
governor's   "tentative  budget   proposal." 

The  Legislature  Follows  Former  Practices 

Whatever  impression  was  given  to  the  public,  a  study  of  the 
actual  procedure  of  the  legislature  during  the  session  of  1916 
leads  to  the  view  that,  although  some  improvements  were  made 
over  former  methods,  in  general  the  idea  of  executive  leadership 
in  budget-making  was  positively  rejected.  Furthermore,  it  is 
not  apparent  that  any  important  changes  were  made  in  legisla- 
tive procedure,  or  that  the  legislature  in  that  session  made  any 
radical  departure  from  previous  practices.  The  legislature  did 
provide,  however,  for  the  future  by  passing  the  Sage-Maier  bud- 
get law.^ 

The  legislature  met  on  January  5,  1916,  and  adjourned  107 
days  later  on  April  20.  During  this  period,  78  sessions  were  held 
on  only  78  days,  and  at  least  31  of  these  78  sessions  were  short 
sessions. 

Notwithstanding  the  fact  that  a  complete  appropriation  bill 
was  laid  before  the  legislature  on  the  first  day  of  the  session, 
members  of  the  senate  and  assembly  began  immediately  to 
introduce  separate  bills  appropriating  the  state's  money  for  the 
benefit,  in  the  main,  of  their  own  localities. 

As  the  session  progressed  hardly  a  day  went  by  without  the 
introduction  of  such  bills.  Altogether,  111  bills  involving  an 
appropriation  of  public  money  were  introduced  in  the  senate  and 
99  in  the  assembly.  Seventy-five  of  these  bills  were  similar  or 
identical   bills   in   both   houses;  26  bills  were  originally  intro- 


*  New  York  Times,  Tribune  and  Sun  of  February  28,  1916. 

*  New  York  Times,  Herald,  Press,  Sun  and  Tribune  of  March  6. 

*  See  below,  p.  24. 

12 


RECEPTION     OF    GOVERNOR'S    PROGRAM 


duced  in  only  one  house,  passed  and  sent  by  message  to  the  other 
house  for  consideration;  34  bills  were  introduced  in  only  one 
house.  The  total  number  of  independent  bills  introduced  in  one 
or  both  branches  of  the  legislature  was,  therefore,  135.  This 
number  does  not  include  the  annual  appropriation  bill  of  $52,781,- 
131.13,  nor  the  $27,000,000  canal  appropriation  from  the  bond 
issue  authorized  by  referendum  at  the  election  of  1915.  The  135 
separate  appropriation  bills  introduced  in  the  legislature  of  1916, 
not  including  the  two  bills  mentioned  above  or  those  listed  in 
the  note  at  the  bottom  of  the  page,  involved  a  total  charge  on 
the  public  treasury  of  $22,171,122.70.^ 

The  following  is  a  complete  tabulation  of  the  bills  involving 
appropriations  introduced  in  the  senate  and  of  the  bills  intro- 
duced in  the  assembly  at  the  legislative  session  of  1916: 


1  The  135  bills  introduced  involving  a  total  of  -122,171,122.70  do  not  include, 
of  course,  the  $25,000,000  bond  issue  to  eliminate  grade  crossings,  subject  to 
referendum  at  the  election  of  1916;  the  .$27,000,000  Erie,  Oswego  and  Cham- 
plain  Canals  bond  issue  approved  by  referendum  at  the  election  of  1915  and 
signed  by  the  governor,  February  21,  1916;  the  bill  providing  for  a  bond  issue 
of  $26,500,000  to  reconstruct  the  Chemung  Canal  subject  to  referendum  at  the 
election  of  1916  (Assembly  Intro.  No.  56);  the  bill  providing  for  a  bond  issue  of 
$10,000,000  to  construct  state  highways  through  New  York  City,  subject  to 
referendum  at  the  election  of  1916  (Assembly  Intro.  No.  1032);  the  appropri- 
ation of  $10,000,000  out  of  the  proceeds  from  the  highway  bond  issue  (S.  Int. 
No.  411);  or  the  appropriation  of  $7,482,500  from  the  canal,  highway  and 
Palisades  Park  sinking  funds  for  payment  of  interest  on  such  debts.  (S.  Int. 
No.  1379.)  The  two  bills  last  mentioned  were  passed  by  the  legislature. 
They  were  not  appropriations  from  the  general  fund.  The  other  bills  provide 
for  bond  issues  dependent  upon  the  result  of  referenda  with  the  exception  of 
the  $27,000,000  canal  bond  issue  approved  in  1915.  Including  the  $52,781,- 
131.13  appropriation  bill,  the  $27,000,000  canal  bond  issue,  the  $22,171,122.70 
in  the  135  bills,  the  $25,000,000  to  eliminate  grade  crossings,  the  $26,500,000  to 
reconstruct  the  Chemung  Canal  and  the  $10,000,000  to  construct  state  high- 
ways in  New  York  City  the  number  of  bills  would  be  140  and  the  amoimt 
involved  $163,452,253.83. 


13 


APPROPRIATIONS    IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 


ft 

o 

»: 
o 

a 


P 
W 
O 

Q 
O 
03 
E- 

CO 

-< 
E- 

w 

E- 
O 

El) 

C3 

-«; 

W 


o 

PS 
Pi 

o 

CO 

oa 


a 


z  5 


D 
O 


n 
e 


^^  o  o)  s;  ® 

►J    mcqSmOhJ 


?§ 


H.3HijSSfeP3<OQO&-aatScoQQO'-<MlS&qQ2S2«2cQ 


•^  CD  C^  t^  C>J  -^ 

00  00  c^  ■<a«  OS  >o 

00  OOCfl  »H        c<i 


Sc^<MM(MC0iOC0MCC'*C^'*-*'O'*MrCiOm  — !0>n>Olt5COffl«001>• 


<<■     <<<;<;<<     *i,^<i->i'i,'S,<<«<.<<<«<<<<<<««<«< 


>ooooooocooooooooooooo-«»*oooooooooo^ 

JOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSOOOOOOOOOOC 


OOOOOOOOOOOiOOOOOOOOOOOOOCCOOOOOOOOOO 
OOOOOOOOOOOQOOOOOOOOOOOO^OOOOOOOOOO 
ooooooooSSocBooooo  0  0_>0_0_0_0_0_-"_0  0_0  0_0_0  0_t^0_0 
>o  ■*  o  o  o"o  o"o">o -"">o"-*  """o"  o"c^"o'>rf'o'c^">oo"f--"o'o'>«--o'o  o  "5  o  t--  o  o 

e©      ^  c^  cc  ^  03  ^ 


o  o  oa> 
ooooo 


^-ic^.— it-H^i— (.— "CO— ioo^^cO'— »cD»-«eo 


■^  "  ?„  a>  "=  6 

^.■"  ^-S  ^O' 

.S    -^  a  a-gc 
.2  §  5^i^-S: 


ozz 


o 

2 


a 


2SSSSiir~ooS»o~«-*'>"racoxi  —  McoaiC!OOoiM'MCnM'0>raocoi3>o>o«> 
MMCQaJoQracQMoiaaMmwaJMaicQMaJMcdwcQMWcQM 


mioioioirt00a>a>a>oo-*-*'rau?'nco:oooco  — «iMC^««t~t— t^t^QOooa>»o>aio>^ 


a  a  a  a  a  a 


a  a  a  a  a  a 


BflHB   —   —   —   —   — 


ii;p^Pz,p^pKpClp:,ELiP^pC4Ci<[x<[z<thCi4pE<pHp4[z< 


14 


RECEPTION    OF    GOVERNOR'S    PROGRAM 


u  ^ 

>, 

l->     CO 

OM 

OJ     QJ 

'V  tc 

a  > 

S'S 

efi 

a  03 

UtiJ 

pqQfeO 

Nt* 

COCO 

o 

CD(M 

t^c- 

CO 

•— < 

OiCi 

V  ^O    ,  fc-    iM     M                    CD 

boo  "^^  <Da^a>           — ' 

B^SvB--M  "S  «^  S'E'H  S  S  S 

-^  «  «  ca  «  rt^a  Muo)  gSrt£S« 


:h  ,, 

!«    « 

ei 

^■f^ 

ee  ;i:  -^     •  ^  J:  ^ 

^e2 

3^ 

t^  cc  »c  CO  oo -^  1^    .  o  t^  OS      M  oo  t^  ci  o  c^      •*  o  r^  t^  t^  lo  ■»}<    .  (M  lo    .  oo  os 

<<i    <<<<    <<■<-<<<<;  £<<<"    <!:<<<;<-5J    «ij<<-ii <<;<;■  £<i-<  S<< 

c4  Pi        tf 


OOOO^OOOC0Q0OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOC5OOOOO»^OO-<t*OOOC>OOOOOOOO 
OOOOr^OOOI^«DOOOOOOOOOOOOOCDOOCDOOOOCDOC0O»^OOO^OOOOC2O^O 
0_t^  O  lOC^O  O^iCI^I^O  O  O  OOOOtOOOOOOOOO^OOCOOO^^U^OC^^OOOOOOOOOOOtO 
00        lOC^iOOW        00  ^w"o  ^O  O  M  i^C^To  t£3  O  O  O  CC  if^O  O  *0  cT-^O  O  "f -^'cT  O  O  O  O  O  »C  O  »C  O  O  Cfl" 

■<JH  ^rt  CO  C^  C^  »n  C^         lO  CO  ^H  lO        o 


«  o 

p,  CO 

O.g' 

C3    C.  MO 

lint  ifd°^t  il"|ti-2.illlig^-^=il^l."^i5|^-o 

&i-^lBl^  sg-a  a^l  £  :-|iJ  i-^-l  &i  i  ^  g|  §  I  g  i  §1  i  "-'^'§-■1^  lil-S  go  a-l 

llH-  S iii^Sil i E Q^i^i ||S §1  i^i ^^11  rili^ oil i^^ §•' 

."  g  £o*=  S-g^  «  £:  £  c«|-Er=?  O'J  &o=;.S^  S  '^ 

ll  Sl|.s|-&-a  g  gj|-&||  I3-|  l&l-lll 

>>  >>         >> 

b=  g     b     i=b  cJ 

||aa^§^«„o|       S^:a=.g^:s^^-^g;2|5 

S:E.H.2  S^'S.S'i  S  E-g  §  S  S  te.H  5  1^-5  |  |  S  S  I  J'g^  J'g.S  I  £  fe|'§^  J'§S  £  -"§  "  S  2  « 
EH3rtZOi;MZ!^SSartSSKtii&:(S^KHHKa3ZSpaSiSfflWHHmfe:m£SmSmZoSz£&: 


Sp. 

a  o 


lOOcDco^*^*^*^*t^^^I>-oooooot»c»(Moooi050JOsOiC505csoso50000»---H-H1-Hl^^cK^c^c^^c<^c^c^c^c^coM 


XSXi^XiXlJD^^ 


U      (_      lU.      1-1 


15 


APPROPRIATIONS    IN    LEGISLATURE,    SESSION    OF    1916 


.5 

4 


o 

I— t 
CO 

CO 
CO 


Q 
fH 
O 

O 
o 

5z; 

PS 
f 

CO 

< 
H 
PS 
E-i 

O 

pa 
c 
p; 
«: 
W 
o 


> 

PS 

pj 
■< 
o 

CO 

iJ 

>^ 

f^ 

O 
E-i 

CQ 


9< 

Z 

C 

o 

a 


a 


pa 


o  o  o 
«  u  » 

V    OJ    0) 

PS  PS  PS 


oa>  o  o 

p4    psps 


t^  ^H        d  CO  ■*  CO  CO  »c        oo  t^ 

»o  ^-      o  o  o  — • -^  —      coco 

oo..»^ .^^.. 

CDOO'^OOOOO  OOioO 

;c^«*c5ocicid  djdd 

Pips      pSpSpSpSpS  PS      PSPS 


BENil 

Slater 
Horton 

»4 

03 

1 

Boylan 

Spring 

Marshall 

Walton 

Jones 

NO 

l-H 

00 

O00«0>t0 
v-^  00  CO  05  t—  OS 

<<    <« 


<  <    -^.  -<  -« -<  -t; 


<:-< 


cc     m     p^moQcococo 

CO 


n 
u 


iOCOOt>.00»OOOOOOOOOOOCv1000000000000000000000 
C0^0'^00-»1*OOOC500000CJ'«J'_000000000000000000000 

CO^-Ot^OO-'J'OOOOOOOOOC-I^OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOiOOOOOO 
OCOtC-^OOOOOOOOOOOOOOSOOOOOOOCSOOOCDOOOkCOOOOO 
■^Ji_»-H_^_OS_0  O  OiC  lO  iO  O  O  O  O  ^O  O -^  '^"^^^1®  O  O  o  O  O  O  O  O  O  O  O  »^0  O  lOO^O 
u^»-H-<j7io  »ft  ir^t-^CO  ^C^OO  "3  t-- *0  O  tCt^^o  IC  00  ift  O  O  O  O  OO  O  U^^O  i^^O  lO 
»-»00  C<I  to— ^^  C^»-H-^cO  CJ— ^OO»OO0CC^OC^C0-H 

t^  ^-  -^CO'-HiO^^^^CO 


.5 

C8 


fJ3        T3  aj 

CC—   1)  _   o 

cam  X  S  0^ 

3  a  a  S    • 

o  08  a  0)^ 

■<  °  2  z 


a  a. 

a>  o 


S  a 


..2  6-^^.-2-| 
i-gO  3  >;.  a  5 

'■-3'^-S  '^  S  " 

°  ">2— =«  s  .r 

■  >  3  2  -  ^  " 
^  ace  o"  ^-i 
J.-     .  a;  J  5i  o  . 

-  a-s  ""s-s  is , 


a;  0) 


'3        " 
i        >> 

a   -^ 


S  2  " 

oJ  e8  g 


a 
.2 

tZ3 

'a 
a 

o 


Of      a 
.2     .° 


O) 


•S  7.-e   ?^  .*;  X   S 


^3 


-o 
25 


-g=.TS  a 
.2  a  I* 
ca  a  ^ 

'i^'a 

^  <a  az 


o  a 


o 


i-^,-r-S>^  a.2 


a  =i  s 
3§^^i.s 


fe  >  a 

73   a   c5 


a^^ 


2  A-- 


co-«;; 


-  =3  J: 


.is? 
^  5-° 

cj  Qj  r 

■s  a^ 

o  o-a 

'  «    CO    o 

"O**-  -a 

—  rf  " 
=:  tl  ^ 


a;  b£ 

S  a       es       d  «  M      a 
■a  a  3  a  -  S  M  S  -° 


a    s_  g.-2-s  »-s  gi 

=    -  ^  0)   .  a 


ca'^-^.kj.2  t-  i^^  >  o  oj  '^ 


sg.tS-S^-gafc 

i  >.  .  o^  a  « 

'^■s>-S'*.a  §■ 

a  3    .  _-  >>,9  ■= 


ga  sQ-a 

J?  !3  >•    .  <" 
v2  «5  §"  «  oz  >.t:=^  ^;-= 

g    S.S    O   £"S>?   «.2   3    «   «   3 

QOCE-PSm^cOQa^coQ 


a  M  I 

<v  a  00 
I  a^  aj 

>  3  2 

o-  S  r 
a  (a  o 

■  Sao 
oj  _r  o 
a  o  bo 

:^  2  a 

*  u  a 

a  a". 

*  fe  I* 
«  o  IS 

»  a  et 

^>> 

tS   03 

Ph  ^ 

Tzaa 


bD 


o 

•  -  s 


0:5s 


o  0)  .■!;  «  "S 

"  .       =  0=  o 

6  a  o  >  ^  >  .  jai 

Qmmoaa     O  ^_.2  <u  OJ  J;-2  o      - '- 

OTSS3aLim'^z-xS-.?c?KjmzSMP3a:zSccSfflB3Zpam 


i  a>^ 

"1  s 

JKZ 


Sic 

a  2  §'-5.s 


a  2 


o   rtit; 


.a 
M  a 


3   OJ  g 


a  fe  E 
o  »  3 
^-Zp; 


^0 

0)  ca-i*s 

e4  fl   S; 
^c^Z 


o 

O 

CO   o 

3   a-5 

11^  a 

-Ml 


a 

o 
H 


n  .-/-I  r/-i  .. 


:  o  - 
>  S  3 


a  a 
o  o 

m  OQ 

o.  a. 

a  a 

o  o 

O      .^  .    OJ 


C  >-j3  r^  Z  kJ  :£  S ; 


c;  „  _ 

cj  a; 

*^  - 

-a  0) 


a 

&E  a  a 
5  ."  Q  - 


>.  a 

a  p 


o.o.o.Q.2.a.o.a<ao.a.Q.a.a.a.Q.Q.a.Q.o.a.ci.o.ci.5  2  S  2  9  9  9  99  9  9  9  5  9  9 


16 


RECEPTION    OF    GOVERNOR'S    PROGRAM 


o 


a 
o 
n 

a. 

S 

o 

ja 

-Hi 


a 

o 

>.J3 

«E-|  a 


a  a 

o  o 

m  tn 

O.  O. 

So  s 

— .  o      bo  a  o 

>.'S:^  c3  S  "s  >>;?' 

c«  2    .  a  S  a3r?    .=  b  S^r.^ 


«  S  m   aj  £ 

-  -  -  cag 


ex  &D 
C9  05 

com 

Horton 

Whitney 

Sage 

Towner 

Newton 

Wagner 

Wagner 

Norton 

Horton 

Halliday 

Argetsing 

coed 

CT>      .OOMOSCOOOO         in 

CO  S  CO  CO  coco' coco'  Saj 

S.     717 

S.     715 

S.    812 

Rec.  No.  181 

Rec.  No.  194 

C050t^Ot^?Ot^OOOiOCC'-<C^«OOOO^COO'^0<MW5C^«0-HCO 


QQcz2coaicz3aicQcoaiaicciy:aia2c/2a3COcccocccca:<7D«3a:2iM 


iC-"  OO  o  o 

o«oooo 

C^i-^O^O^OO^ 


OOO 

ooo 
lO  o  o 


OOOOCOOSOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO'-'OOO 
OOOO-rf<oSOoOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO0iOOO 
O  O  »0  0  ^^O^OO  O  O  O  0_»00  O  lOO  O  O^O  OO  O  O  GO  O  O  t^ 

i^»o  lOM  t-Too  2om  ooo  o»-^»ooi>^cr GOO t-^     o  »o  iO'«j^(r4"od 

iOl'-r  »-*  Tt<  M  ^^  eOi-Hi-H   lO  iO  --*  r-l  f-^  t^  ■<1'   ^  CO  ^N  rt  M   i-H 


8o^  o 
o^-o 
oooo 

OO  wi"o" 
iC  OI>.  (M 

1-1  CS  00 
CO 


ic  C^  »0  '-"  O  eO 


o  <u 


o 

o 


0<  02 

O   X 


"3  a.  ^      ^ 

="  ??  fe    — 

a  ^  >      cj 

M  -ja-s^  §15 
.2  2.£?Jco|-s 

C-  ^    »-  Ci    S    4) 


ta  a  o 

-  C3    "     " 


n 


oi  a>  «  -♦^  ^^  CJ  o 

M  M  ca    3    O 

a  a  M?i§a3 

(D    V    0    u^    a    iD    Zi 

.d ^   O  c4   o^   o 


-  s  a 
-a  Mi3 

*e  u  o) 

*=  t^  !^ 

^- ja  =  -^ 

ODhOO 


o 

—  -3      2 

03   rt  >i  — 
ai  *a  ~^  w 

^   I'   n"  9 

3— r  o  o 
o  o-s  a 

'Sg.a  g: 

V  SCO  ^ 
O   iS  ^ 
fe    O    "    3 ' 

■  l-a-cQ 

fc-   bjD  a  ^. 


£     3  a  H 
!;  aj    -    .55 


aa  o 


co^f^ 


--^ts*   C3   fl   c3 

b  «  t."  s  a 
"a  g  §•§"£ 

oo"  fe  .S  .a  := 
o  S3  iS-Q 


a 

o 


X      eg 

I    aj    M  O    OT 
-S'3    3 

2  "  S  '"^ 
«^  a-- (2 

-^  "  «  |m 

>>  m  3  a     - 
it   Or^^v 

m.SZ.   03 

£.2  a'a.tJ 

O   >   d   g  -*J 

•  s>    .  oT  S 

5    CO    fc-     Sa 


3  tn 

^  ao 
o 


CO 


a 

r  a  rt 
p  ..Tja 


»o 


bO 


coSoS 


•-=5"S 


a  ^  0-" 

2  gKv^ 

=3^   9   M-- 

--"i.sS 

o  <s  S  ca  o 
OQ<h2MMO^OcoWE-i 


>>  o  ca  -  '^_§  ^^.s 

Sdn  a  fc-^-Q  &  - 
j=—  g  -g  a  o  j3  H 
M  ja  S  S  b  J3  M  > 


OJ 


_  o 

ca  ca 
■T3-a 


o 
C 


e 
d  dS 


§gi^g§j5go|.-a||a.o 


5  2  S  vaU  ate  §.3  s  a 
P  ta:=  3  ^^  cat 


dO,^  fe 


.2      O 


p      OO  J9 


^■^  ta 


"■r-  g-^J=-!i  a  g  s  £'§ 


?^  ?,>^>'S-'=z  ^M^><>'' ?i 


?  3. 


o 

a;g"aSa)<D-3:3oSSa>a;"oaa!ng-5gacs2  a^  S"^  3S='S'a3SC_S-sS!*i*?ic  — 
•E  g"C  a  a  o  caja  ca  >>aj3P  ca:=  3  go  catria  £-C;Si,-g  ca  g  g"«  3  £  3^3  Sou  g  §« 

WcoWeQOOhjpqOhJMOoM  worn  paw  i-)^o<;wWhJccmcccBZZmfem<:Q-5zZm!iHK 


;e  &  s^-s 


o 

O        en  OP 

§c8  ca 

^  a<e  S  S 

'S  I  g  a  a 

-^    O    CJ    aj  Gj 

PQt-'P-cCOCQ 


r*-cooooooO'— '■— 'ccu^-^ioo^ooo-— 'COto^oOl:oooso»-•'--*<^^<^^c>^rt'«ococ*l■^ocDGOoooiO^H'^^cocDOOoo 
c^wc^lcccocococoMcoco■^T}1■TJ^■<(J4»o^»c«^lOlOOlO»o»o»ocDocDcD'OcD'00t^^*^-^-GOC»ooola>OlC>oso»os 


OOO■»**"^•^'^'<*^"*^OO-^■^1-l1-HC*«C^C0C0■^^*^»^^^^00Q00i010S0>0SOO'-^|»-^^^lClC»/^000000' 


^  oS   cS   ^ 


APPROPRIATIONS    IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 


O 

o 

to 

K 
H 


Q 

O 
t> 
Q 
O 
Pi 
H 
Z 

OS 

CO 

< 
fa 
Pi 
H 

D3 
H 

Z 
O 

M 
O 


CJ 

PS 
PS 

o 

PQ 

O 

H 
CO 


g 


a 


z 

e 
o 

S 


^  OS  c^ 

&  t-  a 

2  o  " 

<  5  » 

S  P  £i 

^  (C  M 

J  a  to 


o. 

a 

o 

H 

►-4  ^  "^H 


00  c;  —  ^  CC  ^ 

t^  t^  00  t^  OC  00 


oQcocoaicoco 


s 
o 

Christman 

Christman 

Wilson 

Towner 

Towner 

Horton 

Sage 

Halliday 

Horton 
Halliday 
Wellington 
Wellington 

00  en 

MCSOOOOOCCSO 

00 

in 

6 
Z 

»o  »oic  »o 

o. 

a 

o 

M 

S  o    . 

o  b'^ 
t.  c     . 


CC  a;  a;  c/2  CG  CC  a:  CC  Sa:cz:cc;» 


r^  ^  _<      CO  r-  00 

Cl  CO  o        t^  C^  lO 
»—  CM  c^       <M  -^t-  -<*< 


cccc:/i      c/jccoi 


5OOOO{-5OO0;OOiCOOOOOO»0OOOOOO 


':c  QO  O  ^  O  : 
r*  cC  O  r^  O  ; 
t^t^O -MO  : 

00 '-^o  40  o: 


^OO'OOOOOCJOOOOOOC 


^  c;  oo  — 


0000000»000000-rfOOtOOOO 

—  —  —  -^crcro-rooroooooooicoocccoo 
'C  o  o  o  ic  o  c;  — .  o  ■^''  *rri--o"o  lo  ■^'o  o      oo  •-T 


3 

a 


EO    *<    ^  2   s 

^     _  OJ  B  tn  " 

>  fccjS    -1^  p.  B 

fiJ  tl  .Zi  -^   o  >    * . 

il   t   tt  2,  C  *   C 

fO   -   cj^  o  =;   c3 


3  >>r^   0) 


'O 
S-^  a    .  _ 

hJO,SZE- 


C3    p, 

►J  3 


O    t£ 


Ml2 

^  3    -  -"Off 

^   o   fe    ii   G 

.s  a.s  g-2  o 

J3    «    U  _    >,  >> 

*J    C    <LJ—    o    C 

ffcoaZOOWSHH 


&'3 


"5.3  § 

7, 02  J 


■^—    C   o   efl 


J.  .  U    O   ■" 

a""  ^  0^  d.^'*^  a" 
_  q  6ii  E^^  cfl  S 
B  5-a  o  E  M.S 

t^    O      T"*^    <U    >    O 

.t;-i'!^  o  °  c  " 

D.  o    .^2--    ■" 


o-o 


(Z3    C8        ff    u    _  Is 

Zromc/:KPa 


a. 
B 

6 

n1 

6U 

6 

6 

-3 

a 

g 

s 

a  a 

>> 

c 

33 

o  o 

c 

cQ 

jo 

c 

g 

1-5 

s 

22 

-O 

n 

w-j: 

Oi 

o 

cimm 

CJ 

<^ 

o  o 

oo 


a  a 

-C-C   g   (U   o  O 
ir   £j   o 


O 

O 


>> 

-a 


w 


O    O    «3    3    3    r-    H-^ 

O" 


-rilt:    — .—    fc,^    q    r-^    O    O    "2    h    C    O    0.2    C3    5    qj3    y 

X  a  Q  H  K  CO  rZ  B.  :^  E- H  O  O  «  ca  =5  33  Z  K  « :^  < 


2  q^  Oj; 


o 


a> 


C8 


S  JO    £ 


2    ■«■■£ 


o  «0 


3 


,  O 


"  § 


ff  0)  o  o 
t^    ■■?:  e  B 


.«->  00  cn 


!,  CJ  CJ  5  h-=  ca  CJ  3   ?' 


o 


r^cC'i<eoot^c-5-^r^c;-*cr-oc-)r^cC'^ccooci^t^'^w3'«*'»r>r^r^CJC^os"^oc^o-H^^ 


rtrtc8eO^e8e8^gtCc6c8c8rtc8c9rtcflaic8t0eOrtc3cBc8rtc3<0cOc3cflo3tOf~(-^ 


18 


CHAPTER   III 

A   FINANCIAL   CHRONICLE   OF   THE   LEGISLATIVE 

SESSION   OF   1916 


In  order  that  the  student  of  the  legislative  session  of  1916  may 
the  more  readily  trace  the  various  stages  in  the  history  of  the 
governor's  "tentative  budget  proposal,"  the  several  plans  for 
fiscal  reform,  and  the  methods  adopted  in  making  appropriations, 
it  seems  proper  to  set  forth  the  following  financial  chronicle  even 
at  the  possible  cost  of  some  repetition: 

November  4,  1915 — 

Governor  Whitman  appointed  two  budget  advisors  to 
conduct  hearings  and  assist  him  in  drafting  a  tentative 
budget  and  formulating  his  views  on  the  needs  of  the  ad- 
ministrative departments,  before  the  appropriation  bills 
reached  him  in  final  form  from  the  legislature. 

January  5,  1916 — 

In  his  annual  message  to  the  legislature  on  the  "condition 
of  the  state"  Governor  Whitman  included  an  explanation 
with  respect  to  the  form  and  amount  of  the  annual  appro- 
priations, and  submitted,  as  a  model,  a  "tentative"  appro- 
priation bill  appropriating  $57,161,517.44.  All  estimates 
were  included  in  one  consolidated  bill.  With  the  exception 
of  the  administrative  departments  under  the  governor,  no 
changes  in  the  amounts  requested  by  the  various  branches 
of  the  state  government  were  made.  Permission  to  transfer 
items  within  certain  limitations  was  made  contingent  upon 
"executive  order."  In  the  message,  the  governor  recom- 
mended the  enactment  of  an  amendment  to  the  constitution 
giving  the  executive  the  power  to  reduce  the  amount  of 
items  of  appropriation.  The  message,  including  the  "tenta- 
tive budget  proposal"  was  referred  to  the  ways  and  means 
committee  in  the  assembly  and  to  the  finance  committee  in 
the  senate. 

19 


APPROPRIATIONS    IN    LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 

January  11 — 

Dr.  Frederick  A.  Cleveland,  Director  of  the  Bureau  of 
Municipal  Research,  wrote  Governor  Whitman  commending 
him  for  the  "advanced  step"  he  had  taken  "in  submitting  a 
proposed  appropriation  bill  to  the  legislature  during  the  first 
week  of  its  session.  "^  In  addition,  Dr.  Cleveland  raised  with 
the  governor  two  questions: 

1 — Whether  he  should  not  also  "at  a  date  somewhat  later 
than  the  time  when  the  estimates  and  requests  for  ap- 
propriations are  sent  in"  submit  his  views  on  the  meth- 
ods of  raising  revenue  to  finance  the  expenditures. 

2 — Whether  he  should  not  make  public  announcement  to 
the  effect  that,  since  the  estimates  had  been  laid  before 
the  legislature  the  first  day  of  its  session  in  the  form  of  a 
draft  of  a  bill,  no  "emergency  message"  would  be  forth- 
coming this  year  to  assist  the  legislature  in  waving  aside 
the  constitutional  requirement  that  every  bill  must  be 
"printed  and  upon  the  desks  of  the  members  in  its  final 
form  at  least  three  calendar  legislative  days  prior  to  its 
final  passage,  unless  the  governor  .  .  .  shall  have 
certified  to  the  necessity  of  its  immediate  passage."  ^ 

January  20 — 

The  Bureau  of  Municipal  Research  submitted  a  memorial 
to  the  legislature  in  which  it  asked  three  things:^ 

1 — That  the  senate  and  assembly  change  their  rules  of 
procedure  in  such  manner  as  to  permit  the  initial  con- 
sideration of  the  governor's  proposal  in  committee  of 
the  whole  house,  with  the  governor  or  his  representatives 
present  to  answer  questions  concerning  the  recommenda- 
tions in  the  "proposed  tentative  budget." 

2 — That  the  "Legislative  Law"  of  the  state  be  amended 
in  such  manner  as  to  provide  for  committee  of  the  whole 
procedure  on  all  finance  measures.^ 

3 — That  the  "Executive  Law"  of  the  state  be  amended  in 
such  manner  as  to  make  it  the  duty  of  the  Governor  to 
present  annually  to  the  legislature  a  complete  plan  of 
proposed  expenditures  and  estimated  revenues  together 
with  the  measures  of  taxation,  if  any,  which  may  be 
necessary  to  finance  the  expenditures. 

1  Municipal  Research,  No.  69,  p.  75. 

2 Constitution  of  the  State  of  New  York,  Art.  Ill,  Section  15. 

'  Municipal  Research,  No.  69,  pp.  69,  75.  See  also  N.  Y.  Times,  N.  Y.  Sun, 
N.  Y.  World,  of  Jan.  20. 

*  Section  23  of  the  "Legislative  Law"  requires  that  "all  bills  that  involve  any 
appropriations  .  .  .  when  introduced  in  the  senate  shall  be  referred  to  the 
committee  on  finance,  and  when  introduced  in  the  assembly  shall  be  referred 
to  the  committee  on  ways  and  means." 

20 


FINANCIAL     CHRONICLE,     1916     LEGISLATURE 


January  21 — 

Governor  Whitman's  reply  to  Dr.  Cleveland  was  received 
at  the  Bureau  of  Municipal  Research. ^  The  governor  took 
the  following  position: 

1 — That  he  was  in  favor  of  the  executive  doing  what  he  had 
done  this  year,  viz.:  submitting  to  the  legislature  "a 
tentative  appropriation  budget"  to  serve  as  a  proper 
model  for  a  state  appropriation  bill  and  to  show  the  opin- 
ion of  the  governor  with  respect  to  the  estimates  for  all 
departments  under  executive  control,  together  with  the 
estimates  of  other  departments,  as  submitted  to  the 
comptroller,  subject  only  to  executive  revision  as  to  clas- 
sification of  expenditures. 

2 — That  his  suggestion  to  the  legislature  for  an  amendment 
of  the  present  constitution  granting  to  the  executive 
the  right  to  reduce  an  item  in  an  appropriation  bill, 
does  not  disturb  the  balance,  which  exists  under  the 
present  constitution,  between  the  executive  and  the 
legislature,  but  simply  allows  the  executive  a  slightly 
wider  latitude  in  the  exercise  of  his  constitutional  right 
to  check  legislative  action. 

3 — That  if  the  legislature  followed  his  wishes  in  the  matter, 
there  would  he  no  'private  sessions  of  a  legislative  committee 
for  the  consideration  of  an  appropriation  bill. 

4 — That  the  revenue  side  of  the  state's  finance  should  not 
be  taken  up  at  the  same  time  as  the  expenditure  side 
because  the  expenditures  of  the  state  should  not  be 
based  upon  the  possible  revenues  which  may  be  gouged 
out  of  the  taxpayers. 

5 — That  he  had  already,  in  conference  with  the  leaders  of 
the  senate  and  assembly,  informed  them  that  he  would 
insist  upon  the  passage  of  the  appropriation  act  without 
recourse  to  an  emergency  message. 

6 — That  he  was  not  prepared  to  support  any  plan  which 
would  make  the  executive  a  leader  in  fiscal  matters,  or 
that  would  make  the  executive  other  than  what  he  had 
been  in  the  past,  viz.:  an  adviser  to  and  a  check  upon 
the  legislature. 

January  25 — 

The  Bureau  of  Municipal  Research  replied  to  Governor 
Whitman's  letter  of  the  19th.2  The  Bureau  called  atten- 
tion to  the  following: 

1 — That  anyone  who  assumes  responsibility  for  leadership 
on  an  expenditure  program  should  give  some  thought 
to  the  question  of  how  the  money  is  to  be  raised. 

1  Municipal  Research,  No.  69,  p.  79.    Also  N.  Y.  Sun,  Times  and  Herald 
of  Jan.  21. 

^Ibid.,  p.  86.     See  also  TV.  Y.  Herald,  Times  and  Sun  of  Jan.  27. 

21 


APPROPRIATIONS    IN    LEGISLATURE,    SESSION    OF    1916 


2 — That  gross  extravagance  has  been  due  to  lack  of  fore- 
thought and  consideration  of  the  necessary  relation  of 
money-raising  to  money-spending. 

3— That  the  clause  of  the  constitution  ' '  the  governor  .  . 
.  .  shall  communicate  by  message  to  the  legislature  at 
every  session  the  condition  of  the  state,''  among  other 
things  means  financial  ''condition,'''  and  consequently 
"ways  and  means"  of  raising  revenue. 

4 — That  the  executive  could  not  be  held  responsible  for 
results  on  any  "tentative"  or  other  proposal  under  a 
procedure  which  permits  individual  members  to  in- 
crease items  without  consulting  the  wishes  of  the  exec- 
utive or  giving  to  him  an  opportunity  to  be  heard  before 
the  measure  is  passed. 

5 — That  the  committee  of  the  whole  procedure  essentially 
in  the  form  suggested  in  the  draft  accompanying  the 
memorial  of  the  Bureau  to  the  legislature  was  the  pro- 
cedure best  adapted  to  give  publicity  to  financial  pro- 
posals; that  it  afforded  opportunities  to  members  on  the 
floor  to  ask  questions  of  officers  who  are  charged  with 
the  direction  and  management  of  the  state's  business; 
that  it  enabled  executive  officers  to  submit,  explain  and 
defend  plans  which  they  had  conceived  to  be  for  the 
best  interests  of  the  state;  and  that  it  gave  the  people, 
through  the  press,  a  chance  to  know  what  had  been 
going  on  and  to  have  the  benefit  of  discussion  and  criti- 
cism of  plans. 

6 — That  such  a  procedure  had  always  resulted  in  increasing 
the  power  and  control  of  the  legislative  body  by  cutting 
out  the  monopolies  exercised  by  a  few  men  on  standing 
committees,  and  forcing  executive  officers  to  convince  a 
majority  of  the  representatives  of  the  people  that  their 
proposals  are  sound  and  in  the  interest  of  the  general 
welfare,  before  they  are  approved. 

7 — That  the  standing  committee  system  in  this  country 
had  been  the  very  thing  that  had  subverted  the  principle 
of  the  separation  of  powers — put  matters  of  administra- 
tion into  the  hands  of  irresponsible  groups  of  legisla- 
tors and  made  the  irresponsibility,  inefficiency  and 
wastefulness  of  our  government  a  subject  of  constant 
reproach. 

8 — That  public  hearings  by  the  governor,  after  bills  had 
been  passed,  could  not  take  the  place  of  hearings  on  a 
definite  executive  plan  prepared,  submitted  and  dis- 
cussed on  the  floor  of  the  legislature  before  the  appro- 
priation bill  came  up  for  passage;  that  such  pubhc  hear- 
ings could  not  take  the  place  of  leadership  and  open- 
handed  dealing. 

22 


FINANCIAL     CHRONICLE,     1916     LEGISLATURE 


9 — That  if  the  governor  were  given  the  right  to  reduce  as 
well  as  to  veto  items  in  the  appropriation  bill,  the  exer- 
cise of  this  unusual  right,  not  granted  specifically  by 
the  constitution  of  any  other  state,  would  operate  in 
practice  to  take  away  from  the  legislature  its  proper 
function,  enable  the  governor  to  override  the  legislative 
will  without  opportunity  being  given  to  members  to  be 
heard  and  would  create  simply  another  one  of  the  many 
forms  of  "invisible"  government. 

January  26 — 

Senator  Mills  introduced  his  executive  budget  bill,  provid- 
ing— 

1— For  review  of  departmental  estimates  by  the  governor, 
and  the  submission  to  the  legislature,  not  later  than  the 
first  day  of  February  annually,  of  consolidated  estimates 
of  expenditures  together  with  a  plan  of  financing. 

2 — For  the  report  to  the  legislature  by  the  committees 
of  a  single  appropriation  bill  at  least  ten  days  before  the 
day  fixed  for  final  adjournment,  and  for  consideration 
of  this  bill  in  committee  of  the  whole  on  "at  least  six 
full  legislative  days"  as  the  special  order  of  the  day,  with 
the  governor  and  heads  of  departments  present  to  an- 
swer questions  of  members. 

3 — For  separate  vote  in  committee  of  the  whole  on  the 
appropriation  for  each  department,  office,  bureau  and 
institution,  etc. 

January  28 — 

Senator  Argetsinger  introduced  the  Whitman  constitu- 
tional amendment  conferring  on  the  governor  the  power  to 
reduce  items  of  an  appropriation  bill.  The  resolution  was 
referred  to  the  finance  committee  and  was  not  reported  to 
the  senate. 

January  28 — 

Mr.  Adler,  the  "majority  leader"  of  the  assembly  in- 
troduced his  bill  making  the  fiscal  year  of  the  state  end  June 
30,  instead  of  September  30.  This  bill  passed  the  assembly 
March  7,  the  senate  March  28,  and  was  approved  by  the 
governor,  April  3. 

February  5 — 

Governor  Whitman  speaking  before  the  Real  Estate  board 
of  New  York  said: 

"Your  first  question  no  doubt  will  be  what  the  new  state 
finance  plan  means  on  the  side  of  state  economy.     My 

23 


APPROPRIATIONS    IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 

answer  is  that  on  a  comparison  of  like  appropriations 
of  last  year  with  the  governor's  conference  recommenda- 
tions of  this  year,  a  reduction  in  the  cost  of  government 
of  over  $5,000,000  is  shown.  I  stated  in  my  message 
that  /  expected  the  legislature  to  make  a  very  large  de- 
crease below  these  figures  in  the  appropriations  as  finally 
approved.  I  feel  sure  that  the  Legislature  can  reduce 
these  figures  from  one  to  two  million  dollars  more."^ 

February  8 — 

Senator  Bennett  introduced  his  resolution  inviting  the 
governor  to  address  the  legislature,  at  a  joint  session  of  the 
senate  and  assembly  to  be  held  in  the  assembly  chamber 
February  23,  1916,  and  to  answer  questions  by  members  with 
respect  to  his  "tentative  budget,"  the  probable  revenues  of 
the  state  for  the  fiscal  period,  and  "ways  and  means"  as 
to  new  sources  of  revenue  to  the  amount  of  $2,351,806.87 — 
the  excess  of  his  "tentative  budget  proposal"  over  the 
comptroller's  estimates  of  probable  revenues.  The  resolu- 
tion was  referred. 

March  6 — 

Senator  Sage  introduced  his  budget  bill  providing  for  a 
legislative  budget.  This  bill  weakened  the  responsibility 
of  the  governor  for  leadership  in  administration  by  con- 
ferring power  on  two  clerks,  chosen  by  the  chairmen  of  two 
legislative  committees,  to  travel  over  the  state  at  will,  and  to 
prepare  the  annual  appropriation  bill.  The  Sage  bill  con- 
tinued   the   present   "standing   committee"   procedure   on 


1  The  figures  of  his  "tentative  budget  proposal"  referred  to  by  Governor 
Whitman  were  $57,161,517.44.  Instead  of  the  "one  to  two  milhon  dollars" 
reduction  by  the  legislature,  the  following  table  shows  that  the  total  appro- 
priations by  the  legislature  of  1916  were  $61,150,778.37: 

Bills  Approved  by  Governor 

Miscellaneous,  special  bills $178,276 .40 

Highway  (2),  and  barge  canal  towing  fa- 
cilities bills 3,960,071 .20 

Total $4,138,347 .60 

Thirty-Day  Bills  Pending  before  Governor 
on  the  adjournment  of  the  legislature 

Miscellaneous,  special  and  local  bills  ....       4,231,299 .64 
General  appropriation,  supply,  reappro- 

priation,  and  construction  bill  items .  .     52,781,131 .  13 

Total    57,012,430.77 

Total  amount  of  the  Forty-six  Appropriation  Bills $61,150,778.37 

24 


FINANCIAL     CHRONICLE,     1916     LEGISLATURE 


finance  measures.     It  passed  the  legislature  March  23,  and 
was  approved  by  the  governor  April  5.^ 

March  6— 

Senator  Brown  introduced  his  constitutional  amendment 
designed  to  strengthen,  still  further,  legislative  budget  pro- 
cedure by  authorizing  either  house  to  "designate  one  of  its 
members  to  serve  in  the  preparation  of  a  budget  as  a  member 
of  a  commission,  committee  or  otherwise,  when  the  legislature 
is  not  in  session,  with  such  compensation  as  vaixy  be  provided 
by  law."  The  amendment  also  provided  that  all  appro- 
priations "must  be  in  the  annual  appropriation  or  supply 
bill  unless  passed  by  a  two-thirds  vote  of  the  members  elected 
to  each  branch  of  the  legislature,  or  requested  in  a  message 
from  the  governor."  The  resolution  states  that  "neither 
the  appropriation  or  supply  bill  shall  be  passed  under  a 
certificate  of  necessity,"  and  that  after  the  appropriation 
or  supply  bill  has  been  under  consideration,  in  printed  form 
as  finally  reported  by  a  standing  committee,  for  three  sepa- 
rate legislative  days  it  may  be  passed  "as  amended  on  one 
of  such  days."  Amended  on  the  next  to  the  last  day  of  the 
session,  after  having  been  under  consideration  for  the  two 
previous  days,  the  appropriation  or  supply  bill  could  be 
passed  on  the  closing  day  of  the  session,  as  amended  the  day 
previous,  without  a  certificate  of  necessity  from  the  governor. 
Instead  of  correcting  the  abuse  this  resolution  provides  for 
its  continuation.  It  abolishes  the  emergency  message  evil, 
but  permits  the  appropriation  bill  to  be  amended  and  passed 
during  the  closing  hours  of  the  session.^ 

The  amendment  passed  the  Senate,  April  15,  but  was 
held  in  the  ways  and  means  committee  of  the  assembly, 
and  not  submitted  to  that  body  for  consideration. 


1  See  Municipal  Research,  No.  70. 

2  The  text  of  the  Brown  legislative  budget  amendment  (S.  Int.  821,  Pr.  1784) 
is  as  follows:  "Except  as  provided  by  section  twenty  of  article  three,  an  ap- 
propriation at  a  regular  session  of  the  legislature  must  be  in  the  annual  appro- 
priation or  supply  bill  unless  passed  by  a  two-thirds  vote  of  the  members  elected 
to  each  branch  of  the  legislature,  or  requested  in  a  message  from  the  governor. 
Neither  the  annual  appropriation  or  supply  bill  shall  be  passed  under  a  certificate 
of  necessity  or  passed  by  either  house,  or  become  a  law  unless  before  it  is  deemed 
to  be  in  final  form,  it  shall  have  been  under  consideration  on  at  least  three 
separate  legislative  days  in  printed  form  as  finally  reported  by  a  standing  com- 
mittee or  as  amended  on  one  of  such  days.  Either  house  may  designate  one 
of  its  members  to  serve  in  the  preparation  of  a  budget  as  a  member  of  a  com- 
mission, committee  or  otherwise,  when  the  legislature  is  not  in  session,  with 
such  compensation  as  may  be  provided  by  law. " 

25 


APPROPRIATIONS    IN    LEGISLATURE,    SESSION    OF    1916 

April  5 — 

The  finance  and  ways  and  means  committees  acting 
jointly,  for  the  first  time,  reported  the  annual  appropriation 
bill  to  the  legislature.  Under  the  rules,  however,  the  bill 
could  not  be  considered,  and  on  April  12,  it  was  referred 
back  to  the  committees  for  amendment.^ 

April  17— 

The  annual  appropriation  bill  was  considered  in  the  As- 
sembly for  two  and  one-half  hours  and  passed  under  a  "short 
roll  call",  i.e.,  a  five-second  proceeding  under  which  four 
names  are  called — the  first  and  last  names  on  the  roll,  and  the 
names  of  the  majority  and  minority  leaders — 'and  a  party 
vote  of  90  ayes  and  40  noes  recorded  on  the  bill. 

April  19— 

The  senate  passed  the  annual  appropriation  bill  after  a 
five-hour  debate,  participated  in  by  Senators  Bennett, 
Brown,  Sage  and  Wagner. 

April  20— 

The  legislature  adjourned. 

Of  the  1,477  bills  introduced  in  the  senate.  111  involved 
the  appropriation  of  money  from  the  state  treasury,  and  of 
the  1,596  introduced  in  the  assembly,  99  placed  a  charge  upon 
the  taxpayers  of  the  state.^  The  general  appropriation  bill 
and  45  additional  appropriation  bills  passed  the  legislature. 
The  amount  of  money  appropriated  by  the  45  bills  was 
$8,369,647.24.  Adding  this  amount  to  the  annual  appropri- 
ation bill  of  $52,781,131.13  brings  the  grand  total  passed  by 
the  legislature  to  $61,150,778.37.  Thirty-six  of  the  45  bills, 
involving  appropriations  of  $4,231,299.64  are  now  (May  8, 
1916)  pending  before  the  governor  as  thirty-day  bills,  along 
with  the  appropriation  bill.  While  the  $4,231,299.64  in- 
cludes the  $1,956,275.98  "town  aid"  highway  appropria- 
tion, no  less  than  $1,618,142.09  of  the  remaining  $2,275,- 
023.66  was  rushed  through  the  legislature  during  the  last  day 
and  a  half  of  the  session  immediately  after  the  passage  of  the 
appropriation  bill  at  1.00  p.m.  Wednesday,  April  19.^ 


^  See  below,  p.  51. 

*  Of  the  1,477  bills  introduced  in  the  senate  and  the  1,596  introduced  in  the 
assembly  many  were  identical.  The  number  of  bills  passed  l)y  the  legislature 
was  80.3,  of  which  260  were  approved  and  5  vetoed  before  the  legislature  ad- 
journed.    See  above,  pages  13-19  for  additional  details. 

'See  below,  p.  80  for  action  of  Governor  on  these  bills. 

26 


CHAPTER   IV 

THE  APPROPRIATION  ACT   PREPARED   BY  THE 

FINANCE   AND    WAYS    AND    MEANS 

COMMITTEES 


The  "tentative  budget  proposal,"  accompanied  by  the  executive 
tabulation  of  the  departmental  requests  submitted  by  Governor 
Whitman,  was  referred,  immediately  after  the  reading  of  the 
annual  message  of  the  governor,  to  the  finance  committee  of  the 
senate  and  the  ways  and  means  committee  of  the  assembly. 

January  20,  Mr.  Maier,  Chairman  of  the  ways  and  means 
committee  introduced  the  governor's  tentative  proposal  in  the 
assembly  as  the  annual  appropriation  bill.  The  bill  received  its 
first  reading,  consisting  of  the  following  remarks  by  the  clerk, 
"  the  people  of  the  state  of  New  York  represented  in  senate  and 
assembly  do  enact  as  follows"  and  was  referred  to  the  ways  and 
means  committee.  The  bill  was  given  introductory  number  281, 
printed  number  295,  The  introduction  served  the  purpose  of 
supplying  the  members  of  the  legislature  and  others  with  addi- 
tional copies  of  the  governor's  proposal  and  was  evidently  calcu- 
lated to  have  a  political  effect, — to  show  that  the  assembly 
leaders  were  "with  the  governor." 

In  the  meantime,  the  standing  committees  sent  the  governor's 
bill,  informally,  to  the  comptroller's  office  with  instructions  to 
rearrange  the  items  in  accordance  with  the  usual  practice,  retain- 
ing the  itemized  schedules.  The  comptroller's  edition  of  the 
budget  appeared  suh  rosa  in  limited  numbers  about  the  middle 
of  February.  Apparently  the  editors  received  instructions  to 
tear  apart  the  appropriations  for  each  particular  institution  and 
di\ision  of  the  government  so  that  amounts  to  become  imme- 
diately available  could  be  brought  together  in  a  separate  supply 
bill,  and  amounts  to  be  appropriated  for  construction,  repairs 
and  permanent  betterments  compiled  into  a  construction  and 
repairs  bill,  etc.  The  bills  as  thus  compiled  from  the  disin- 
tegrated "tentative  proposal"  were  named  "Parts,"  and  the 
whole  bound  under  one  cover.  At  the  same  time,  the  words 
3  27 


APPROPRIATIONS    IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION    OF    1916 

"Schedule  A,"  "Schedule  B,"  etc.,  and  the  short  statement  with 
respect  to  the  total  amount  appropriated  under  each  schedule  were 
omitted  from  the  text  of  the  new  bill.  Inadvertently,  however, 
the  sections  at  the  end  of  the  governor's  bill  were  reprinted  in  the 
comptroller's  edition,  so  that  the  conditions  under  which  trans- 
fers of  items  within  a  schedule  could  be  made  were  set  forth  with- 
out any  possibility  of  a  transfer  ever  taking  place,  because  the 
word  "Schedule,"  to  which  the  conditions  specifically  appHed, 
had  been  omitted  from  the  text  of  the  bill.  It  thus  appeared  as 
early  as  the  first  of  March  that  it  was  the  intention  of  the  standing 
committees  to  adopt  the  policy  of  itemization  for  each  institution, 
department,  etc.,  and  definitely  to  appropriate  such  detailed 
segregated  items  as  fixed  sums  without  permitting  any  transfer 
whatsoever. 

So  far  the  bill  remained  the  same  as  the  Whitman  bill  with  the 
two  very  important  exceptions  noted  above  as  to  transfers  and 
the  setting  up  of  separate  supply  bill,  construction  bill  items,  etc. 
The  Whitman  plan  brought  the  entire  story  with  respect  to  an 
institution  together  at  one  place  in  the  bill;  the  committee  plan 
broke  this  story  into  some  three  or  four  parts.  The  amounts 
remained  the  same  except  that  items  of  the  Whitman  "work 
program"  now  became  "fixed  items"  of  appropriation. 

The  finance  and  ways  and  means  committees  did  not  hold 
public  hearings  on  the  bill.  Through  their  knowledge  of  past 
experience,  through  secret  investigations,  and  calls  made  by 
department  heads,  and  members  of  the  legislature,  etc.,  the 
chairmen  and  their  associates  came  to  decisions  as  to  amounts 
to  be  appropriated.  It  should  be  recorded  to  the  credit  of 
Senator  Sage  and  Assemblyman  Maier  that  the  committees  of 
both  branches  of  the  legislature  worked  jointly.  The  bill  as 
presented  on  April  5,  contained,  therefore,  the  views  of  the  two 
committees.  This  effectively  obviated  the  usual  conference  ses- 
sions and  amendm.ent  during  the  closing  hours  of  the  session. 
April  12  the  bill  was  again  amended.  The  changes  made,  how- 
ever, were  only  minor  ones. 

The  System  of  Transfer  of  Items  Provided  for  in  the  Whitman  Bill 

Before  the  specific  differences  between  the  1915  appropriation 
bill,  the  Whitman  bill  and  the  1916  bill  are  pointed  out,  it  is 
important  to  set  forth  in  detail  the  scheme  included  in  the  Whit- 
man bill  by  which  the  executive  was  empowered,  on  application 

28 


THE     COMMITTEES'     APPROPRIATION    BILL 


from  the  department  or  institution  head,  to  authorize  a  transfer 
from  one  item  to  another  under  a  "personal  service"  or  other 
schedule  of  an  institution,  etc. 

A  statement  preceded  each  schedule.  In  the  case  of  the  Hud- 
son River  State  Hospital,  for  example,  the  statement  v/as  as 
follows: 

HUDSON  RIVER  STATE  HOSPITAL 

For  payment  for  services  of  employees  at  Hudson  River  State  Hos- 
pital, the  sum  of  three  hundred  fourteen  thousand  nine  hundred  eighty- 
six  dollars  ($314,986). 

SCHEDULE  A 
PERSONAL  SERVICE 

The  above  statement  was  followed  by  a  "work  program"  or 
itemization  of  the  personal  service  schedule  for  the  institution. 
The  $314,986  was  a  fixed  appropriation.  The  items  under  the 
"personal  service"  schedule  also  became  fixed  appropriations 
unless  the  governor  by  an  executive  order  honored  requests  for 
transfers  from  one  item  to  another  under  the  schedule  in  question. 
The  entire  text  of  the  procedure  under  which  this  was  to  take 
place,  subject  to  limitations  on  the  executive  in  honoring  such 
transfers,  is  printed  verbatim  from  the  Whitman  bill: 

The  several  amounts  enumerated  in  a  list  of  proposed  payments  for  serv- 
ices and  expenses  entitled  "schedule,"  in  this  act  and  following  an  item 
of  appropriation,  indicate  the  initial  plan  of  distribution  of  such  appropria- 
tion and  not  additional  moneys  appropriated.  A  sum  appropriated,  with 
schedule,  for  personal  service  or  for  maintenance  other  than  personal 
service  shall  be  paid  out  onh'  in  accordance  with  the  schedule  therefor, 
unless  it  be  modified  as  hereinafter  provided.  A  plan  for  the  revision  of  a 
schedule  to  provide  for  the  distribution  and  apportionment,  in  a  manner 
different  from  that  set  forth  in  the  original  schedule,  of  a  sum  so  appro- 
priated or  the  unexpended  balance  thereof,  may  be  from  time  to  time 
submitted  in  writing  to  the  Governor.  Where  the  appropriations  relate 
to  State  institutions,  any  such  plan  may  be  submitted  by  the  following 
authorities:  For  State  prisons,  by  the  Warden  or  Superintendent  of  a 
State's  prison,  or  a  hospital  for  the  criminal  insane,  subject  to  the  approval 
of  the  Superintendent  of  State  Prisons;  for  a  State  charitable  institution, 
by  the  Superintendent  or  head  of  such  institution,  subject  to  the  approval 
of  the  board  of  managers  or  trustees  of  the  institution;  for  institutions 
subject  to  the  provisions  of  the  Insanity  Law,  by  the  Superintendent  or 
head  of  such  institution,  subject  to  the  approval  of  the  State  Hospital 
Commission.  In  all  other  cases,  the  plan  may  be  submitted  by  the 
commission,  board  or  officer  for  whose  department,  office  or  functions 
the  appropriation  is  made.  If  the  Governor  shall  approve  the  plan,  he 
shall  transmit  the  same  with  his  certificate  of  approval  to  the  Comptroller, 
and  the  Comptroller  thereafter,  in  the  expenditure  of  such  appropriation, 
shall  be  governed  thereby.  A  plan  may  be  withdrawTi  and  amended  to 
meet  the  Governor's  objections,  if  any,  and  resubmitted. 

A  position  established,  or  substituted  by  any  such  revision,  within  the 
competitive  class  of  the  classified  civil  service  shall  be  filled  in  accordance 
with  the  Civil  Service  Law  and  Rules. 

Modifications  of  personal  service  schedules  as  provided  in  this  act, 
shall  be  restricted  as  follows:  (a)  From  salaries  regular  to  salaries  regular; 

29 


APPROPRIATIONS    IN    LEGISLATURE,    SESSION    OF    1916 

(b)  from  salaries  temporary  to  salaries  temporary;  (c)  from  wages  regular 
to  wages  regular;  (d)  from  wages  temporary  to  wages  temporary;  (e) 
the  amount  expendable  in  any  month  for  salaries  of  regular  employees 
shall  not  exceed  one-twelfth  of  the  total  amount  available  by  the  original 
schedule  for  salaries  of  regular  employees;  (f)  the  amount  expendable  in 
any  week  for  wages  of  regular  employees  shall  not  be  more  than  the  pro 
rata  of  the  number  of  working  days  in  such  week  to  the  total  number  of 
working  days  provided  by  the  original  schedule  line  for  the  whole  year; 
(g)  the  salary  or  compensation  of  a  member  of  a  board  or  commission, 
or  other  officer,  at  the  head  of  a  State  department  or  office,  or  of  any  deputy 
of  such  department,  board,  commission  or  office,  as  specified  in  an  original 
schedule  of  this  act,  shall  be  the  salary  or  compensation  of  such  member, 
oflficer  or  deputy  for  one  year,  notwithstanding  the  existing  provisions  of 
any  other  statute  fixing  the  annual  salary,  or  the  compensation,  at  a 
different  amount,  except  that  such  salary  or  compensation  may  be  re- 
duced but  not  increased  by  a  revision  of  the  schedule  under  this  act. 

Differences  between  the  Appropriation  Bills  of  1915,  the  Whitman 
Bill  and  the  1916  Bills 

The  appropriation  bills  of  1915,  the  Whitman  bill,  and  the  1916 
bills,  in  addition  to  variations  in  amounts,  present  fundamental 
differences 

1 — As  to  transfers,  as  described  above 

2 — As  to  the  manner  in  which  appropriations  were  made 
available  to  spending  officers,  i.e.,  either  segregated  or  lump 
sum  appropriations 
3 — As  to  grouping  in  one  place  or  distributing  the  appro- 
priations for  particular  purposes 
4 — As  to  the  method  of  handling  the  supply  or  deficiency 
appropriations,  the  amounts  of  which  are  made  '^ imme- 
diately available" 
With  respect  to  the  first  point,  it  should  be  noted  that  the 
1915  and  1916  bills  contained  nothing  resembling  the  transfer 
scheme  of  the  Whitman  bill. 

With  respect  to  the  second  and  third,  it  is  believed  that  the 
best  way  to  show  these  differences  is  by  an  actual  comparison 
of  the  items  for  one  institution  as  contained  in  each  one  of  the 
three  bills.  The  text  of  each  bill  relating  to  the  State  Hospital 
for  the  Insane  at  Kings  Park  has  been  taken  for  this  compar- 
ison. 

Appropriation  Bills  of  1915 

In  the  general  appropriation  bill  of  1915,  the  appropriation  for 
this  institution  reads  as  follows: 

KINGS  PARK  STATE  HOSPITAL 

For   maintenance,   eight  hundred  fourteen   thousand  seven  hundred 
tweoty-five  dollars  (S8 14,725. 00). 

30 


THE     COMMITTEES'     APPROPRIATION     BILL 


"Maintenance"  as  used  in  the  1915  bill  included  "personal 
service."  In  the  "repairs  and  construction"  appropriation  bill, 
$116,000  was  appropriated  in  three  appropriations  for  this  hos- 
pital. There  were  also  three  appropriations  totalling  SI  ,216.95  in 
the  "supply  bill, "  and  three  appropriations  in  the  reappropriation 
bill  of  $98,470.34.  Thus  after  an  examination  of  the  general  ap- 
propriation bill,  the  construction  bill,  the  supply  bill,  and  the  re- 
appropriation  bill,  the  student  would  find  that  ten  appropriations 
totalling  $1,030,412.29  were  made  for  this  hospital  in  1915,  and 
that  the  largest  item,  $814,725  was  carried  in  the  general  appro- 
priation bill  as  a  single  lump  sum  appropriation  as  shown  above. 

Whitman  Bill 

The  limited  information  in  the  1915  bill  as  to  the  manner  in 
which  these  appropriations  were  to  be  expended  should  be  com- 
pared with  the  appropriation  statements  for  the  same  institution 
reprinted  below  verbatim  from  the  Whitman  bill.  The  total 
amount  recommended  by  the  governor  was  $976,640.32.  The 
statement  embraced  absolutely  every  item  of  expenditure  deemed 
necessary  for  this  institution,  including  repairs  and  construction 
items,  so  that  the  total  to  be  appropriated  for  Kings  Park  State 
Hospital  appears  in  the  one  bill,  and  not  three  or  four  separate 
bills,  or  separate  "parts"  of  a  collective  bill.  The  Whitman 
bill  ran  as  follows: 

KINGS  PARK  STATE  HOSPITAL 

For  payment  for  services  of  employees  at  Kings  Park  State  Hos- 
pital, the  sum  of  four  hundred  twelve  thousand  seven  hundred  forty-one 
dollars  and  32  cents  ($412,741.32). 

SCHEDULE    A 
PERSONAL    SERVICE 

Administration 
General 

Salaries,  regular 

Medical    superintendent. .  .  $5,000  .  00 

First  assistant  physician .  .  3,000.00 

First  assistant  physician. .  .  2,681 .67 
Senior  assistant  physician, 

4  at  $2,200 8,800.00 

Senior  physician 2,033 .  33 

Assistant    physician,    6    at 

$1,600 9,600.00 

Assistant  physician 1,525.00 

Assistant  physician 1,541 .66 

Assistant  physician 1,441 .66 

Assistant  physician 1,383 .33 

Assistant  physician 1,375.00 

Assistant    physician,    2    at 

$1,200 2,400.00 

Assistant  physician 1,200 .00 

31 


APPROPRIATIONS    IN    LEGISLATURE,    SESSION    OF     1916 


Woman     physician,     2     at 

$1,800 $3,600.00 

Medical  interne,  2  at  $1,000  2,000 .00 

Pharmacist 1,200.00 

Accountant 1,080 .00 

Dentist 900.00 

Stenographer 816 .00 

Stenographer 788 .00 

Stenographer 760 .  00 

Stenographer 728 .00 

Stenographer 684 .  00 

Chief  transportation  agent .  720 .  00 

Chief  transportation  agent .  600 .  00 

Research  assistant 600 .  00 

Watchman,  3  at  $600 1 ,800 .  00 

Coachman 720.00 

Barber 660.00 

Special  attendant,  mail  clerk  516.00 
Special  attendant,  9  at  $600  5,400 .  00 
Special  attendant,  stenogra- 
pher   460.00 

Special   attendant,    operat- 
ing room 516 .00 

Special  attendant,drug  room  484 .  00 

Driver,  7  at  $396 2,772 .00 

Attendant,  drug  room 356 .00 

Attendant,  2  at  $408 816 .00 

Night  attendant,  2  at  $432  864.00 

Attendant  stenographer .  .  .  408 .  00 
Attendant  stenographer,  2 

at  $300 600.00 

Pageboy 258.00 

Pageboy 276.00 

Pageboy..... 272.00 

Attendant,  dining  room,  15 

at  300 4,500.00 

Cook,  10  at  $420 4,200.00 

Special  attendant,  transfer 

of  patients 600.00 

Special  attendant,  transfer 

of  patients 516 .00 

Housekeeper 480 .  00 

Fireman  (fire  marshal) ....  780.00 
Special    attendant,    sewage 

disposal  plant 600 .00 

$85,311.65 
Accounting  and  stores 
Salaries,  regular 

Steward $2,491.67 

As.sistant  steward 1,500.00 

Bookkeeper 1,260.00 

Accountant 1,080.00 

Storekeeper 1,020 .00 

Stenographer 936  00 

Stenographer 908 .00 

Stenographer 876 .  00 

Voucher  clerk 748 .00 

Voucher — treasurer's  clerk .  720 .  00 
Special  attendant,  steward's 

office 600.00 

Special     attendant,     store- 
house    556 . 00 

32 


THE     COMMITTEES'     APPROPRIATION     BILL 


Attendant,  2  at  S408 $816 .00 

$13,511.67 

$98,823.32 

Ward  service 
Salaries,  regular 

Supervisors $8,992 .00 

Charge  nurses  and  charge 

attendants 35,052 .00 

Nurses  and  attendants  ....  156,297 .00 

Special  attendants 2,220 .00 

202,561.00 

Nurses'  training 
Salaries,  regular 

Principal  of  Training  School  $  1 ,200 .  00 

1,200.00 

Industrial 

Salaries,  regular 

Chief  supervisor $744 .  00 

Shoemaker 768.00 

Tailor 768.00 

Shop  foreman 768 .  00 

Supervisor 660 .  00 

Special     attendant,     shoe- 
maker   600.00 

Special      attendant,     linen 

room,  2  at  $600 1,200 .00 

Special     attendant,     dress- 
maker   516.00 

Special     attendant,     seam- 
stress, 2  at  $516 1,032 .00 

Special     attendant,     tailor 

shop 600.00 

Special  attendant,  mat  shop  600 .  00 

Special  attend't,  fancy  class  516.00 

Special  attendant,  art  class  460.00 
Special    attendant,    basket 

work 480.00 

Special    attendant,    basket 

work 600.00 

Special  attendant,  reed  work  516.00 

Attendant,  3  at  $300 900.00 

Attendant,  linen  room  ....  408.00 

12,136.00 

Kitchen  and  dining  room 

Salaries,  regular 

Chef $1,140.00 

Head  cook,  5  at  $660 3,300 .00 

Cook,  8  at  $420 3,360 .00 

Cook,  9  months 315 .00 

Kitchen  helper,  11  at  $360  3,960.00 
Kitchen  help'r,  9  m'ths,  2 

at  $360 540.00 

Charge  attend't,dining  room  420 .  00 
Attendant,     dining     room, 

26  at  $300 7,800.00 

Attendant,  dining  room,  9 

months,  6  at  $300 1,350 .00 

Attendant,  dining  room  .  .  .  408 .  00 

Special  attendant,  3  at  $516  1,548 .00 
Attendant,    kitchen,    2    at 

$408 816.00 

24,957.00 

33 


APPROPRIATIONS     IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 

Baker 
Salaries,  regular 

Baker $816.00 

Assistant  baker,  2  at  $540  1,080.00 


$1,896.00 


Meat  stores 

Salaries,  regular 

Meat  cutter $816 .00 

Special      attendant,     meat 

cutter 600.00 


1,416.00 


Laundry 

Wages,  regular 

Supervisor  of  laundry $900 .  00 

Driver 396.00 

Special  attendant 600 .  00 

Launderer,  7  at  $420 2,940 .00 

Special     attendant,     soap- 
maker  and  launderer. .  .  .  568 .00 
Head  laundress,  2  at  $420  840.00 
Laundress,  18  at  $264 4,752 .00 


10,996.00 


Mechanical 
Engineering 
Wages,  regular 

Chief  engineer $1,560 .00 

First  assistant  engineer,  3 

at  $984 2,952.00 

Second  asst.  engineer,  2  at 

$816 1,632.00 

Electrical  engineer 1,200.00 

Fu-eman,  15  at  $780 11,700 .00 

Special  attendant,  engineer's 

department 600 .  00 

$19,644.00 

Repairs 
Wages,  regular 

Master  mechanic $1,560 .00 

Electrician 750 .00 

Plumber,  3  at  $936 2,808 .00 

Steamfitter  and  mach'st . .  .  936.00 

Steamfitter 936.00 

Special  att'd't,   plumber  3 

at  $600 1,800.00 

Special  attd.  steamfitter. .  .  600.00 
Special  attendant,  electrical 

dept.,  2  at  $600 1,200.00 

Carpenter,  8  at  $816 0,528 .00 

Carpenter  and  locksmith.  .  816.00 

Painter,  4  at  $816 3,264 .00 

Mason 900.00 

Mason 750.00 

Tinsmith 816.00 

Special  attndt.  tinsmith  ...  600 .00 

Special  attndt.  mason 600.00 

Painter 816.00 

Blacksmith,  2  at  $816 1,632.00 


$27,312.00 
46,956.00 


34 


THE     COMMITTEES'     APPROPRIATION    BILL 


Field  service,  farm,  garden  and  grounds 
Wages,  regular 

Supervisor,  2  at  $744 $1,4S8 .00 

Head  farmer 792 .00 

Farmer,  2  at  $516 1,032 .00 

Florist 768.00 

Gardener 660 .00 

Driver,  5  at  $396 1,980 .00 

Special  attdt.,  gardener. .  .  .  600.00 

Laborer,  4  at  $360 1,440 .00 

Attdt.,  farm,  5  at  $408 2,040 .00 

$10,800.00 

Salaries,  temporary 

Temporary  services $1,000 .00 

1,000.00 

Total  of  Schedule  A $412,741 .32 


For  the  expenses  of  maintenance  and  operation  of  Kings  Park  State 
Hospital,  the  sum  of  five  hundred  nineteen  thousand  eight  hundred  and 
ninety-nine  dollans  ($519,899). 

SCHEDULE    B 
MAINTENANCE    AND    OPERATION 

(Other  than  Personal  Service) 

Food " $306,384.00 

Fuel,  Hght,  power  and  water 72,270 .00* 

Printing 1,661 .00 

Advertising 25 .  00 

Equipment 

Office $556.00 

Household 25,883  .00 

Medical  and  surgical 1,000 .00 

Wearing  apparel 6,700 .00 

Farm  and  garden 1,000 .  00 

Live  stock 3,000 .00 

General  plant 5,711 .00 

$43,950.00 

Supplies 

Office $900.00 

Household 1,800 .00 

Laundry,  cleaning  and  disinfect- 
ing   1,900.00 

Medical  and  surgical 2,700 .00 

Motor  vehicle 780.00 

Botanical  and  agricultural 4,100.00 

Forage  and  veterinary 8,000 .00 

Refrigerating 280 .00 

General  plant 7,759 .00 

28,219.00 

Materials 

Highway $500 .00 

Industrial 24,000 .00 

General  plant 8,562 .00 

33,062.00 

Traveling  expenses 6,426 .00 

Communication 

Postage,  including  parcel  post..        $1,850.00 

Telephone  and  telegraph 1,250.00 

Express  and  freight 1,746 .00 

4,846.00 

35 


APPROPRIATIONS     IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 

Fixed  charges  and  contributions 
Allowance  for  commutation  to 
various  employees  in  lieu  of 

maintenance $13,225 .00 

General  plant  service 8,831 .00 

Rent 1,000 .00 

Total  of  Schedule  B $519,899 .00 

REPAIRS 

For  work  done  by  contract  or  upon  estimate  or  for  the  pur- 
chase of  materials  or  the  employment  of  labor  in  addition 
to  that  appropriated  elsewhere  for  repairs  to  buildings 
and  to  equipment $10,000 .  00 

CONSTRUCTION   OR   PERMANENT   BETTERMENTS 

For  furniture  and  equipment  for  new  buildings $15,000.00 

For  storage  tank  for  water  supply 12,000 .00 

For  reconstruction  of  elevators 7,000 .00 

Total  for  institution $976,640.32 

The  Committee  Appropriation  Bill  of  1916 

The  finance  and  ways  and  means  committees  submitted  their 
joint  bill  to  the  legislature  practically  in  its  final  form  on  April  5. 
While  the  Whitman  bill  brought  together  all  the  items  relating  to 
the  expenditures  of  an  institution,  department,  etc.,  at  one  place 
in  the  bill,  the  committee  bill  did  just  the  opposite.  The  com- 
mittees, as  has  been  explained  above,  adopted  the  itemized  "work 
program"  form  of  bill  but  without  the  possibility  of  transfer. 
In  the  case  of  the  Kings  Park  State  Hospital  there  were  six  "fixed'' 
appropriations  in  the  Whitman  bill,  viz.,  one  for  "personal  serv- 
ice," one  for  "maintenance  and  operation,"  and  four  for 
"repairs"  and  "construction  or  permanent  betterments,"  etc. 
The  committees  of  the  legislature,  instead  of  appropriating  one 
item  for  personal  service  and  one  item  for  maintenance  and 
operation  in  the  same  hospital,  etc.,  set  up  357  separate  items  of 
appropriation.  In  other  words,  the  committees  went  back  to 
the  old  form  except  that  they  set  up  the  positions  and  salaries 
in  very  much  greater  detail  than  they  have  been  accustomed  to 
do  in  the  past.  By  failing  to  include  a  clause  through  which 
transfers  might  be  made  they  wholly  disregarded  the  method  of 
appropriations  recommended  by  the  governor.  They  tied  this 
and  every  other  institution  to  a  hard  and  fast,  detailed,  segre- 
gated appropriation  bill.  In  the  debate  on  the  appropriation 
bill  in  the  senate,  which  is  printed  in  the  appendix,  the  effect 
of  this  itemization  on  the  departments  is  described  by  Senator 
Bennett.^ 

The  357  items  of  appropriation  for  the  "personal  service"  and 

» Below,  pp.  103^. 

36 


THE     COMMITTEES'     APPROPRIATION     BILL 


"maintenance  and  operation"  etc.,  of  the  Kings  Park  State 
Hospital  are  reprinted  below  as  in  the  bill  passed  by  the  legisla- 
ture on  April  19.  The  357  items  constitute  357  separate  and 
distinct  appropriations.  No  one  of  these  can  be  used  or  expended 
for  any  other  purpose.  The  comptroller,  who  draws  the  war- 
rants of  payment  for  all  the  expenditures,  has  no  discretion,  and 
he  must  insist  that  the  vouchers  conform  in  every  detail  to  the 
language  of  the  appropriation.  So  that  it  is  plain,  there  is  no 
elasticity  and  no  possibility  of  modification  left  to  the  executive 
in  charge  of  the  institution. 

KINGS  PARK  STATE  HOSPITAL 
Curative    {Continued) 

For  payment  for  services  of  employees  at  Kings  Park  State  Hospital: 

Administration 
General 

Salaries,  regular 

Medical  superintendent $5,000 .00 

First  assistant  physician 3,000 .00 

First  assistant  physician 2,681 .67 

Senior  assistant  physician,  4  at  $2,200 8,800 .00 

Senior  physician 2,033 .33 

Assistant  physician,  6  at  $1,600 9,600 .00 

Assistant  physician 1,525 .00 

Assistant  physician 1,541 .66 

Assistant  physician 1,441 .66 

Assistant  physician 1,383 .33 

Assistant  physician 1,375 .00 

Assistant  physician,  2  at  $1,200 2,400 .00 

Assistant  physician 1,200 .00 

Woman  physician,  2  at  $1,800 3,600 .00 

Medical  interne,  2  at  $1,000 2,000 .00 

Pharmacist 1,200 .00 

Accountant 1,080 .00 

Dentist 900 .00 

Stenographer 816 .00 

Stenographer 788 .00 

Stenographer 760 .  00 

Stenographer 728 .00 

Stenographer 684 .00 

Chief  transportation  agent 720 .  00 

Chief  transportation  agent 600 .00 

Research  assistant 600 .  00 

Watchman,  3  at  $600 1,800 .00 

Coachman 720.00 

Barber 660 .00 

Special  attendant,  mail  clerk 516 .00 

Special  attendant,  9  at  $600 5,400 .00 

Special  attendant,  stenographer 460 .00 

Stenographer,  city  office,  4  months  at  $61 244.00 

Special  attendant,  operating  room 516 .00 

Special  attendant,  drug  room 484 .00 

Driver,  7  at  $396 2,772 .00 

Attendant,  drug  room 356 .00 

Attendant,  2  at  $408 816 .00 

Night  attendant,  2  at  $432 864 .00 

37 


45<l08i 


APPROPRIATIONS    IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 

Attendant  stenographer $408 .  00 

Attendant  stenographer,  2  at  $300 600 .00 

Page  boy 258 .00 

Page  boy 276.00 

Page  boy 272 .00 

Attendant,  dming  room,  15  at  $300 4,500 .00 

Cook,  10  at  $420 4,200 .00 

Special  attendant,  transfer  of  patients 600.00 

Special  attendant,  transfer  of  patients 516.00 

Housekeeper 480 .  00 

Fireman  (fire  marshal) 780 .00 

Special  attendant,  sewage  disposal  plant 600.00 

Accovmting  and  stores 
Salaries,  regular 

Steward 2,491 .67 

Assistant  steward 1,500 .00 

Bookkeeper 1,260  00 

Accountant 1,080 .00 

Storekeeper 1,020 .00 

Stenographer 936 .00 

Stenographer 908 .00 

Stenographer 876 .00 

Voucher  clerk 748 .00 

Voucher — treasurer's  clerk 720 .00 

Special  attendant,  steward's  office 600 .00 

Special  attendant,  storehouse 556 .00 

Attendant,  2  at  $408 816 .00 

Ward  service 
Salaries,  regular 

Supervisors 8,992 .  00 

Charge  nurses  and  charge  attendants 35,052 .00 

Nurses  and  attendants 156,297 .  00 

Special  attendants 2,220 .00 

Nurses'  training 
Salaries,  regular 

Principal  of  training  school 1,200 .00 

Industrial 

Salaries,  regular 

Chief  supervisor 744 .  00 

Shoemaker 768 .00 

Tailor 768 .00 

Shop  foreman 768 .00 

Supervisor 660 .  00 

Special  attendant,  shoemaker 600 .  00 

Special  attendant,  linen  room,  2  at  $600 1,200.00 

Special  attendant,  dressmaker 516 .00 

Special  attendant,  seamstress,  2  at  $516 1,032 .00 

Special  attendant,  tailor  shop 600 .00 

Special  attendant,  mat  shop 600 .00 

Special  attendant,  fancy  class 516 .00 

Special  attendant,  art  class 460 .00 

Special  attendant,  basket  work 480 .00 

Special  attendant,  basket  work 600 .00 

Special  attendant,  reed  work 516 .00 

Attendant,  3  at  $300 900 .00 

Attendant,  linen  room 408 .00 

Kitchen  and  dining  room 
Salaries,  regular 

Chef 1,140.00 

Head  cook,  5  at  $660 3,300 .00 

38 


THE     COMMITTEES'     APPROPRIATION     BILL 


Cook,  8  at  $420 $3,360 .00 

Cook,  9  montha 315 .00 

Kitchen  helper,  11  at  $360 3,960.00 

Kitchen  helper,  9  months,  2  at  $360 540 .00 

Charge  attendant,  dining  room 420.00 

Attendant,  dining  room,  26  at  $300 7,800 .00 

Attendant,  dining  room,  9  months,  6  at  $300 1,350.00 

Attendant,  dining  room 408  .00 

Special  attendant,  3  at  $516 1,548 .00 

Attendant,  kitchen,  2  at  $408 816 .00 

Baker 

Salaries,  regular 

Baker 816 .00 

Assistant  baker,  2  at  $540 1,080 .00 

Meat  stores 

Salaries,  regular 

Meat  cutter 816 .00 

Special  attendant,  meat  cutter 600 .00 

Laundry 

Wages,  regular 

Supervisor  of  laundry 900 .  00 

Driver 396 .00 

Special  attendant 600 .00 

Launderer,  7  at  $420 2,940 .00 

Special  attendant,  soapmaker  and  launderer 568.00 

Head  laundress,  2  at  $420 840 .00 

Laundress,  18  at  $264 4,752 .00 

Mechanical 
Engineering 
Wages,  regular 

Chief  engineer 1,560 .00 

First  assistant  engineer,  3  at  $984 2,952 .00 

Second  assistant  engineer,  2  at  $816 1,632 .00 

Electrical  engineer 1,200 .00 

Fireman,  15  at  $780  . 11,700.00 

Special  attendant,  engineer's  department 600.00 

Repairs 

Wages,  regular 

Master  mechanic 1,560 .00 

Electrician 750 .00 

Plumber,  3  at  $936 2,808 .00 

Steamfitter  and  machinist 936 .00 

Steamfitter 936 .00 

Special  attendant,  pluml^er,  3  at  $600 1,800 .00 

Special  attendant,  steamfitter 600 .00 

Special  attendant,  electrical  dept.,  2  at  $600 1,200.00 

Carpenter,  8  at  $816  . 6,528 .00 

Carpenter  and  locksmith 816 .00 

Painter,  4  at  $816 3,264 .00 

Mason 900 .00 

Mason 750 .00 

Tinsmith 816.00 

Special  attendant,  tinsmith 600 .  00 

Special  attendant,  mason 600 .00 

Painter 816 .00 

Blacksmith,  2  at  $816 1,632.00 

Field  service,  farm,  garden  and  grounds 
Wages,  regular 

Supervisor,  2  at  $744 1,488 .00 

Head  farmer 792 .00 

39 


APPROPRIATIONS    IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 

Farmer,  2  at  $516 $1,032 .00 

Florist 768 .00 

Gardener 660 .00 

Driver,  5  at  $396 1,980 .00 

Special  attendant,  gardener 600 .00 

Laborer,  4  at  $360 1,440 .00 

Attendant,  farm,  5  at  $408 2,040 .00 

Salaries,  temporary 

Temporary  services 1,000 .  00 

MAINTENANCE    AND    OPERATION 

For  the  expenses  of  maintenance  and  operation  of  Kings 
Park  State  Hospital,  other  than  personal  service: 

Food $306,384  .00 

Fuel,  light,  power  and  water 72,270 .00 

Printing  and  advertising 1,500 .00 

Equipment 

Office,  household,  medical  and  surgical,  wearing  apparel, 

farm  and  garden,  live  stock  and  general  plant 44,000.00 

Supplies 

Office,  household,  laundry,  cleaning  and  disinfecting, 
medical  and  surgical,  motor  vehicle,  botanical  and 
agricultural,  forage  and  veterinary,  refrigerating  and 
general  plant 28,000 .00 

Materials 
Highway,  industrial  and  general  plant 33,000 .00 

Traveling  expenses ,  6,426 .  00 

Communication 

Postage,  including  parcel  post,  telephone  and  telegraph 
and  express  and  freight 4,500 .00 

Fixed  charges  and  contributions 

Allowance  for  commutation  to  various  employees  in  lieu 

of  maintenance 13,225 .00 

General  plant  service 8,831 .00 

Rent 1,000 .00 

Variations  in  the  form  of  the  Committee  Bill 

The  appropriation  bill  was  not  uniform  throughout.  In  the 
case  of  appropriations  for  "personal  service,"  the  bill  treated 
each  institution  as  a  separate  unit  and  included  all  the  costs  of 
personal  service  under  the  head  of  the  institution  in  question. 
In  the  matter  of  "maintenance  and  operation"  appropriations, 
however,  different  methods  were  followed.  For  example,  "main- 
tenance and  operation"  costs  for  hospitals  were  grouped  according 
to  institutions,  all  appropriations  for  a  given  institution  for  those 
purposes  being  under  one  title.  On  the  other  hand  maintenance 
and  operation  costs  for  state  normal  schools  were  treated  accord- 
ing to  another  scheme.  Instead  of  regarding  each  school  as  a 
unit,  the  committee  classified  all  of  the  normal  school  appro- 
priations for  maintenance  and  operation  according  to  the  follow- 
ing titles: 

40 


THE     COMMITTEES'     APPROPRIATION     BILL 


Fuel,  light,  power,  and  water 

Printing 

Advertising 

Equipment 

Supplies 

Hired  horses  and  vehicles 

Travelling  expenses 

Communication 

Fixed  charges 

General  plant  service 

Rent 

Contingencies 

An  excellent  example  of  the  way  in  which  these  appropriations 
were  treated  is  afforded  by  the  following  extract  from  the  bill 
making  appropriations  for  fuel,  light,  power  and  water  for  the 
normal  schools: 

Fuel,  light,  power  and  water 

State  college  for  teachers $3,360 .00 

Brockport 3,900 .00 

Buffalo 7,675 .00 

Cortland 3,400 .00 

Fredonia 4,000 .00 

Geneseo 4,325 .00 

New  Paltz 2,791 .00 

Oneonta 3,200 .00 

Oswego 6,000 .00 

Plattsburgh 2,500 .00 

Potsdam 4,500 .00 

The  picture  for  any  particular  institution  was  not  completed 
with  the  appropriations  for  personal  service,  maintenance  and 
operation.  The  legislator  in  search  of  the  full  record  of  the  cost 
of  any  institution  would  have  to  turn  also  to  Part  II  containing 
the  "supply  bill,"  Part  III,  containing  ''repairs  and  construc- 
tion," and  Part  VI  containing  "reappropriations." 

The  Supply  Bill 

In  the  case  of  the  Kings  Park  State  Hospital  it  happened  that 
no  supply  bill  items  were  necessary.  Neither  were  any  amounts 
made  "immediately  available,"  in  the  governor's  bill.  Part  II 
of  the  committee  bill,  however,  was  devoted  entirely  to  the 
appropriation  of  the  amounts  usually  known  as  the  "supply 
bill." 

It  was  reported  in  the  press  that  the  Whitman  bill  did  away 
with  the  supply  bill  evil.     This  was  not  the  fact,  however.     The 

41 


APPROPRIATIONS    IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1018 

total  amount  of  money  made  "  immediately  available  "  in  the  gov- 
ernor's bill  was  $340,330.05,  as  compared  with  $1,901,272.67,  the 
"supply  bill"  appropriation  of  "Part  II"  of  the  1916  appropria- 
tion bill.i 

The  Construction  Bill 

"Part  III"  of  the  committee  bill  was  identical  with  the  usual 
separate  "repairs  and  construction"  bill.  Amounts  of  this 
nature  were  included  in  the  Whitman  bill  under  each  institution, 
department,  etc.,  as  shown  on  p.  36.  In  the  committee  bill  such 
amounts  were  torn  apart  and  set  up  separately.  For  example, 
the  new  construction  contemplated  at  the  Kings  Park  State 
Hospital  was  not  grouped  with  the  regular  appropriations  for  this 
hospital,  but  in  the  special  "Part  III"  containing  the  repair  and 
construction  items  for  the  entire  state.  In  order,  therefore,  for 
anyone  to  know  what  amount  of  money  was  being  appropriated 
for  any  institution  or  department  of  the  state  government,  it  was 
necessary  to  look  for  such  appropriations  in  three  or  four  places  in 
the  bill.  In  the  case  of  the  Kings  Park  State  Hospital  the  repair 
and  construction  items,  on  page  583  of  the  appropriation  bill, 
were  as  follows : 

1  Detailed  Statement  of  Amounts  made  "immediately  available"  in  the 
Whitman  Bill: 

State  Comptroller $9,000 .00 

Secretary  of  State 36,190 .  15 

Attorney  General 48,383 .11 

Education  Department 76,200 .00 

Conservation  Commission 66,100 .00 

Department  of  Health 18,160 .00 

Fiscal   Supervisor — Charities 534 .  29 

Department  of  Architecture 5,000 .00 

State  Engineer  &  Surveyor 80,762  .50 

$340,330.05 

In  those  cases  where  an  appropriation  to  supply  a  deficiency  was  required, 
this  "supply  bill"  amount  was  included  in  the  preliminary  statement  preceding 
the  schedule.  In  the  case  of  the  Department  of  Health,  Division  of  Labora- 
tories and  Research  the  following  serves  to  illustrate  this  feature  of  the  bill: 


:i 


DEPARTMENT   OF  HEALTH— DIVISION  OF  LABORATORIES  AND  RESEARCH 

For  the  payment  of  services  of  employees  of  the  Division  of  Laboratories 
and  Research  of  the  Department  of  Health,  the  sum  of  seventy-six  thousand 
three  hundred  and  ninety  dollars  ($76,390),  of  which  the  sum  of  three  thousand 
three  hundred  ten  dollars  {$3,310)  is  to  be  made  immediately  available. 

SCHEDULE    A 
PERSONAL   SERVICE 

The  above  statement  is  reprinted  in  order  to  show  how  the  Whitman  proposal 
met  the  problem  of  the  "su])ply  bill."  This  particular  schedule  made  $3,310, 
of  the  $76,390  appropriated  for  personal  service,  immediately  available. 

42 


THE     COMMITTEE'S     APPROPRIATION    BILL 


KINGS  PARK  STATE  HOSPITAL 

REPAIRS 

For  work  done  by  contract  or  upon  estimate  or  for  the  pur- 
chase of  materials  or  the  employment  of  labor  in  addition 
to  that  appropriated  elsewhere  for  repairs  to  buildings 
and  to  equipment $10,000 .00 

CONSTRUCTION   OR   PERMANENT   BETTERMENTS 

For  furniture  and  equipment  for  new  buildings $26,000 .00 

For  refrigerating  plant 3,000 .00 

For  reconstruction  of  elevators 5,000 .00 

For  additional  appropriation  for  new  building  for  em- 
ployees    30,000 .00 

As  is  shown  in  the  reprint  of  ''Part  I"  and  "Part  III,"  the 
total  of  the  appropriation  items  for  the  Kings  Park  State  Hospital 
is  not  indicated.  It  was  $1,006,121.32.  The  Whitman  "tenta- 
tive budget  proposal"  was  $976,640.32,  and  the  total  of  the  1915 
appropriation  bill  for  this  institution  was  $1,030,412.29. 

The '' Pink  Sheets" 

In  addition  to  the  formal  appropriation  of  items  the  appro- 
priation bill  of  1916  presented  to  the  legislature  the  following 
statements  attached  to  the  front  pages: 

1 — An  "Explanation" 

2 — A  comparative  analysis  by  departments  of  amounts 
appropriated  in  1915,  amounts  proposed  in  the  tentative 
executive  bill  and  amounts  proposed  by  the  finance  and 
ways  and  means  committees  for  1916 

3 — A  "budget  statement  or  financial  plan." 

The  statements  covered  six  pages.  They  were  known  as  the 
"pink  sheets,"  and  were  used  continually  in  the  debate.  With 
the  thought  that  they  form  a  valuable  part  of  a  complete  picture 
of  the  legislative  consideration  of  money  bills,  they  are  reprinted 
in  full,  as  follows: 


43 


APPROPRIATIONS     IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 

EXPLANATION 

This  bill  consists  of  seven  parts. 

Part  I  makes  the  necessary  appropriations  to  carry  the 
various  departments,  commissions,  institutions,  etc.,  through 
the  fiscal  year  July  1,  1916,  to  June  30,  1917.  It  represents 
the  contemplated  overhead  charges  for  that  period  and 
totals  $35,410,856.44. 

Part  II  makes  what  appropriations  are  necessary  to 
supplement  those  made  in  1915  in  order  to  carry  the  depart- 
ments to  July  1,  1916,  together  with  other  items  like  indem- 
nities and  contributions  to  county  fairs  which  are  not  part  of 
the  overhead  charges  of  government.    It  totals  $1,901,272.67. 

Part  III  makes  appropriations  for  repairs  and  new  con- 
struction to  state  institutions.  It  includes  also  appropria- 
tions for  canal  repairs  and  totals  $3,100,978. 

Part  IV  contains  miscellaneous  items  which  are  not  a 
departmental  charge  such  as  Constitutional  Convention 
Printing,  etc.     It  totals  $747,592.07. 

Part  V  contains  appropriations  which  are  not  a  tax  upon 
the  state  at  large,  such  as  the  maintenance  of  armories  in 
the  third  and  fourth  brigades,  which  is  paid  by  the  counties 
in  the  respective  brigade  districts,  and  Court  stenographers 
and  attendants  which  are  refunded  by  tax  upon  the  judicial 
districts.     This  totals  $1,072,122.57. 

Part  VI  contains  reappropriations. 

Part  VII  contains  the  debt  service  totaling  $10,548,309.38. 

The  complete  bill  makes  appropriations  totaling  $52,781,- 
131.13. 

The  appropriations  for  highway  maintenance  and  repair 
are  included  in  other  bills  and  total  $5,871,347.18  which 
makes  the  aggregate  budgetary  appropriations  $58,652,- 
478.31. 

The  following  tabulation  shows  a  complete  analysis  of  the 
bill  together  with  comparison  with  the  Executive  budget 
and  the  1915  appropriations: 


44 


APPROPRIATIONS    IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 


SCHEDULE    OF   DEPARTMENTS 

PART    I 

PART   II 

PART   III 

Executive 

$111,250.00 

379,502.00 
527,111.00 

204,728.80 

$701.86 

49,730.07 

9,301.04 

543,618.19 

105.00 

1,827.50 

Administrative 

Secretary  of  State 

Comptroller 

Miscellaneous  Funds 

Troy  and  Waterford .... 

Indian  Affairs 

20,557.75 

41,875.00 

380,570.00 

80,220.00 

1,378,350.00 

Treasurer 

Attorney-General 

35,333.34 

Civil  Service  Commission.  . 

Legislative 

196,983.33 

Constitutional  Convention . 

Estate,  Jacob  E.  Conklin . . 

Judicial 

Court  of  Appeals 

239,920.00 
1,027,445.00 
89,100.00 
15,710.00 
21,135.00 
12,800.00 
81,570.00 

3,000.00 
29,763.81 

$250,000.00 

Supreme  Court 

1,100.00 

Appellate  Division 

State  Reporter 

Supreme  Court  Reporter  .  . 

Miscellaneous  Reporter  .  . . 

Court  of  Claims 

1,684.00 
100,000.00 

13,400.00 

17,220.00 

1,750.00 

Judgments 

Regulative 

Excise  Department 

348,475.00 

287,680.00 

108,980.00 

1,200,784.00 

91,000.00 

404,840.00 

120,240.00 

203,315.41 

257,620.00 

16,200.00 

1,500.00 

62,848.00 

24,500.00 

18,550.00 

4,150.00 

6,736.00 

994,560.00 

6,884,500.00 

79,905.00 

Department  of  Health  .... 

Laboratories  and  Res'ch . 
Industrial  Commission .... 

68,000.00 

Pub.  Serv.  Com.,  1st  Dist. 

Pub.  Serv.  Com.,  2nd  Dist. 

175,000.00 

Health  Officer,  Port  of  N.  Y. 

Superintendent  of  Elections 

Tax  Department 

482.09 

Athletic  Commission 

Racing  Commission 

1,555.00 

State  Institute,  Buffalo .... 

4,750.00 

Foods  and  Markets 

Weights  and  Measures .... 

Embalming  Examiners .... 
Port  Wardens    

Educational 

Education  Department .... 

Fixed  charges,  etc 

Examinations  Bureau .... 

194,302.26 

7,500.00 

10,250.00 

1,200.00 

35,000.00 

Applied  to  Dental  Society 

State  Col.  and  Nor.  Schook 

Indian  Affairs    

664,174.00 

68,895.00 
1,800.00 

Commission  for  Blind    .  . 

40,430.00 

397,500.00 

5,000.00 

17,245.00 

Blind  Institutions 

9,500.00 

^sunshine  Societv 

Alfred  University  Ceramics 
Cornell  Drill  Hall 

100.00 

151,000.00 

Nautical  School 

73,975.00 
447,877.00 

Agricultural 

Department  of  Agriculture . 
Fixed  charffes.  etc 

356.93 
490,980.95 

Exp.    Station,    Geneva 

Alfred  Universitv 

137,525 .  10 
43,625.00 

457,670.66 
48,000.00 
69,590.00 
42,500.00 
37,203.00 

2,000.00 

850.00 

Cornell  Agricultural  School 
Cornell  Agricultural  School 

Cornell  Veterinary 

Morrisville 

St.  Lawrence 

12,655.00 

9,000.00 

478.33 
1,005.64 

41,000.00 
2,000.00 

46 


THE     COMMITTEE'S    APPROPRIATION    BILL 


PART  IV 


PART  V 


TOTAL 


TENTATIVE 
EXECUTIVE 


1915 


$707,448.13 
40,143.94 


$3,000.00 
300,134.00 
109,746.11 


$111,951.86 

429,232.07 

536,412.04 

748,346.99 

105.00 

22,385.25 

41,875.00 
415,903.34 

80,220.00 

1,575,333.33 

707,448 .  13 

40,143.94 

495,920.00 
1,358,442.81 

198,846.11 
15,710.00 
21,135.00 
12,800.00 
83,254.00 

100,000.00 

361,875.00 

304,900.00 

178,730.00 

1,200,784.00 

91,000.00 

579,840.00 

120,240.00 

203,315.41 

258,102.09 

16,200.00 

3,055.00 

67,598.00 

24,500.00 

18,550.00 

4,150.00 

6,736.00 


1,196,362 

6,884,500 

90,155 

1,200 

768,069 

1,800 

40,430 

407,000 

5,000 

17,345 

151,000 

73,975 


26 
00 
00 
00 
00 
00 
00 
00 
00 
00 
00 
00 


448,233.93 

490,980.95 

139,525.10 

44,475.00 

470,325.66 

48,000.00 

78,590.00 

83,978.33 

40,208.64 


$104,700.00 

415,272.00 
525,686 .  15 
634,311.99 


20,557.75 

42,660.00 

429,697.61 

84,920.00 

1,390,982.50 

717,000.00 


235,570.00 
1,355,998.64 
187,523.54 
15,760.00 
21,135.00 
12,800.00 
76,545.00 


345,835.00 
480,085.00 


1,074,524.00 

91,000.00 

394,840.00 

120,240.00 

144,765.41 

252,090.00 

15,800.00 

1,500.00 

62,537.00 

15,000.00 

18,500.00 


7,995,610.00 

752,419.00 

36,000.00 

396,500.00 

17,885.00 
184,360.00 


416,762.00 

381,283.60 

131,618.43 

42,865.00 

501,429.66 

78,580.00 
42,265.00 
37,183.00 


$117,337.54 

444,398.32 

*607,178.47 

466,096.25 


20,503.80 

30,650.00 

453,892.61 

100,700.30 

1,834,758.75 
522,500.00 


244,109.46 
1,282,088.68 

170,900.00 
16,160.00 
21,400.00 
12,800.00 
96,558.36 

175,000.00 

375,721.65 
405,787 .  15 


1,425,000.00 

291,000.00 

960,827.61 

185,179.93 

203,740.00 

314,826.00 

14,700.00 

1,542.37 

75,124.00 

15,000.00 

18,550.00 

6,219.13 

7,043.00 


7,904,798.04 

1,027,588.43 

37,318.21 

426,850.00 

19,700.00 
150,000.00 
100,445.00 

486,338.76 

1,080,112.25 

142,633.33 

46,825.00 

626,753.00 

70,000.00 
46,990.56 
40,300.00 


*  Includes  items  in  Canal  Fund  subdivisions. 

47 


APPROPRIATIONS    IN    LEGISLATURE,    SESSION    OF    1916 


SCHEDULE    OF   DEPARTMENTS 


PART   I 


PART   II 


PART   III 


Syracuse  

Delhi 

Long  Island 

Cobleskill 

State  Fair  Commission .... 
Defensive 

Adjutant-General's  Office .  . 

National  Guard 

Camp,  Peekskill 

Naval  Militia 

Armory  Commission 

Grand  Army  Republic  .... 
Penal 

Prison  Department 

Commission  of  Prisons .... 

Probation  Commission .... 

Parole  Board 

Prisons 

Matteawan 

Dannemora 

Curative 

Hospital  Commission 

Hospitals 

Charitable 

Board  of  Charities 

State  and  Alien  Poor 

Charities  Bldg.  Committee 

Fiscal  Supervisor 

Institutions 

Protective 

Trustees  Public  Buildings  .  . 

Department  Public  Bldgs .  . 

Conservation  Department . 

Public  Lands 

Reservations,  Parks,  etc. .  . 
Constructive 

Engineer  and  Surveyor.  .  .  . 

Department  of  Architecture 

Highway  Department .  .  . 

County  Roads 

General 

Banking  Department  . .  . 

Insurance  Department .  . 
Canal 

Comptroller 

PubHc  Works 

Engineer  and  Surveyor.  . 

Court  of  Claims 

Surveys 

Debt  Service 


$90,744.00 
33,800.00 
55,630.00 
34,500.00 

113,280.00 

118,950.00 

733,310.00 

12,140.00 

70,000.00 

18,375.00 

3,000.00 

42,055.00 

21,000.00 

12,100.00 

15,725.00 

1,149,131.70 

218,239.32 

153,611.00 


197,999 . 

7,281,472. 

59,110, 

75,090 . 

500. 

62,340 . 

3,055,970 . 

83,234. 
289,229 , 
684,458 , 
8,900 
156,971 

59,610 
200,940 

288,553 


00 
32 

80 
00 
00 
00 
00 

00 
55 
73 
00 
00 

00 
00 
00 


258,335 
439,484 

13,800 

1,008,725 

30,000 

5,000 

45,000 


00 
00 

00 
30 
00 
00 
00 


S650.00 


939.40 
46,500.00 


900.00 
849.94 


450.00 

16,355.93 

1,152.00 


2,400.00 
1,085.51 

8,500.00 
403.34 


591.27 


213.90 
'24,594.95 
'"336.69 


5,000.00 
135.00 


186.00 


50,000.00 


State  and  County  Roads .... 
Town  and  County  Highways . 
Indian  Reservation  Highways 
Canal  Constr.  Special  Fund .  . 
Special  Constr.  Public  Works 
Lapsed  Activities 


Prison  Capital  Fund .  . 
Military  Record  Fund 


$35,410,856.44 


115,262.47 
2,000.00 


$1,901,272.67 


$32,300.00 
10,000.00 
27,500.00 
50,000.00 

100,000.00 


5,000.00 


160,858.00 


119,000.00 
34,900.00 
31,200.00 


653,120.00 


571,700.00 

4,000.00 
15,000.00 


40,150.00 


195,000.00 


246,100.00 


$3,100,978.00 


35,000.00 


*  Includes  items  in  Canal  Fund  subdivisions. 

48 


THE     COMMITTEE'S    APPROPRIATION     BILL 


PART   IV 


PART   V 


TOTAL 


EXECUTIVE 
TENTATIVE 


1915 


$747,592.07 


$659,242.46 


1,072,122.57 


$123,044.00 

43,800.00 

83,130.00 

85,150.00 

213,280.00 

119,889.40 

784,810.00 

12,140.00 

70,000.00 

838,475.46 

3,000.00 

42,955.00 

21,849.94 

12,100.00 

16,175.00 

1,284,487.63 

254,291.32 

184,811.00 

200,399.00 
7,935,677.83 

67,610.80 

75,493.34 

500.00 

62,931.27 

3,627,670.00 

87,447.90 

304,229.55 

709,053.68 

8,900.00 

197,457.09 

59,610.00 
205,940.00 
288,688.00 
195,000.00 

258,335.00 
439,484.00 

13,800.00 
1,255,011.30 
30,000.00 
55,000.00 
45,000.00 
10,548,309.38 


$52,781,131.13 

3,875,071.20 

1,956,275.98 

40,000.00 


$58,652,478.31 

150,262.47 

2,000.00 

49 


$90,624.00 

45,100.00 

121,580.00 


211,380.00 

115,100.00 

725,010.00 

12,140.00 

70,000.00 

787,617.51 

3,000.00 

40,810.00 

20,500.00 

10,250.00 

15,725.00 

1,112,356.50 

274,120.16 

169,040.00 

158,769.00 
8,103,428.32 

131,500.80 

500.00 

62,264.29 

3,625,099.00 

83,234.00 
289,130.05 
689,020.50 


249,415.85 

*150,060.00 
175,755.00 
203,500.00 
100,000.00 

233,340.00 
429,359.00 


1,279,395.80 


11,563,953.38 


551,655,725.44 

3,522,792.00 

1,943,000.00 

40,000.00 


$57,161,517.44 

146,292.49 

2,000.00 


$145,820.00 

42,050.00 

273,059.42 

2,000.00 

132,140.35 


934,428.94 

86,653.94 

913,793.88 

3,000.00 

46,278.51 

21,922.63 

14,513.23 

8,775.00 

1,285,894.18 

237,110.50 

169,500.00 

147,640.00 

8,147,402.58 

140,929.25 

500.00 

55,620.00 

3,518,286.46 

136,721.84 
304,965.25 
726,008.96 
10,000.00 
203,860.43 

132,131.06 

175,755.00 

200,500.00 

97,000.00 

275,310.00 
464,200.00 


1,817,820.00 


9,611,514.52 


$53,607,051.89 

4,037,001.88 

1,840,000.00 

40,000.00 

3,654,000.00 

274,000.00 

545,718.09 


$63,997,771.86 

149,340.00 

2,000.00 


APPROPRIATIONS    IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF    1916 


BUDGET  STATEMENT  OR  FINANCIAL  PLAN 


STJMMABY   STATEMENT  OF  APPROPRIATIONS  MADE  FOR   GENERAL   PURPOSES  OF  GOVERNMENT  FOR 
THE  FISCAL  YEAR  BEGINNING  JULT  1,  1916,  AND  ENDING  JUNE  30,  1917,  AND  THE  PRO- 
VISIONS   MADE    FOR    FINANCING    EXPENDITURES    THEREFROM 

Budget  Appropriations  for  General  Purposes,  classified  as  follows: 
Part  1,  overhead  charges  fiscal  year  July  1,  1916,  to  June  30, 

1917 835,410,856.44 

Part  2,  appropriations  to  become  immediately  available ....  1,901,272 .  67 

Part  3,  construction  and  repair  item 3,100,978.00 

Part  4,  miscellaneous 747,592 ,  07 

Part  5,  county  armory  funds,  court  attendants,  etc 1,072,122 .  57 

Part  6,  reappropriations 

Part  7,  debt  service \\  10,548,309 .  38 

State  and  county  highway 3,875,071 .  20 

Town  and  county  highway 1,956,275.98 

Indian  reservations 40,000 .  00 


Total  Budget  appropriations $58,652,478.31 

Estimated  Resources  to  meet  Budget  Appropriations 

Cash  balance  June  30,  1916,  estimated $12,146,055.74 

Less     Reserve     for     estimated     obligations 


against   unexpended    balances    of   former 
appropriations  at  June  30,  1916. 2,000,000.00 


Indirect  Revenues 

Excise  tax $9,000,000 .  00 

Corporation  tax 12,000,000.00 

Organization  of  corporations  900,000.00 

Transfer  (inheritance  tax) . .  .  9,500,000 .  00 

Stock  transfers  (stamp  tax) .  .  5,000,000 .  00 

Mortgage  tax 1,600,000.00 

Motor  vehicles 2,673,000.00 

Other  revenues  and  receipts.  .  4,120,875.00 


$10,146,055.74 


Direct  Taxes 

Armory  tax $660,000 .  00 

Court  and  stenographers'  ex- 
penses   412,883. 18 


$44,793,875.00 


$1,072,883.18 
Less  reserve  for  Armory  tax 
to  be  collected  in  1916-1917 
and    appropriated    by    the 
Legislature  of  1917 660,000 .  00 


412,883.18 
45,206,758.18 


Net  Resources  available  to  meet  Budget  Appropriations 55,352,813.92 

Balance  to  be  provided $3,299,664 .  39 


Pending  Measures  if  enacted  are  estimated  to  produce  the  following: 
By  continuing  the  25  per  cent  increase  in  Excise  tax  is  estimated  will  produce  an 

additional $3,750,000 .  00 

Amendments  to  the  Inheritance  Tax  Law 2,000,000 .  00 

Re-enactment  of  the  Secured  Debt  Tax  Law 900,000 .  00 

Amendments  to  the  Corporation  Tax  Law 200,000 .  00 

$6,850,000.00 
If  one-half  of  the  increase  of  the  Excise  tax  is  given  to  the  localities  the  above 

estimate  will  be  reduced  by 1,875,000.00 


$4,975,000.00 


50 


CHAPTER  V 

THE    APPROPRIATION    BILL    BEFORE    THE    LEGIS- 
LATURE FOR  CONSIDERATION. 


The  Action  in  the  Assembly 

On  January  20,  Mr.  Maier,  chairman  of  the  ways  and  means 
committee  of  the  assembly,  introduced  Governor  Whitman's 
"tentative  budget  proposal"  as  the  annual  appropriation  bill. 
This  important  measure  received  its  first  reading  as  follows : 

Speaker  of  the  Assembly:  "First  reading  of  the  bill." 

Clerk  of  the  Assembly:  "The  people  of  the  state  of  New 
York  represented  in  senate  and  assembly  do  enact  as  follows:" 

Speaker  of  the  Assembly:  "Referred  to  the  committee 
on  ways  and  means." 

The  printed  number  of  the  governor's  bill  was  "assembly 
295." 

How  much  influence  the  governor's  proposal  had  on  the  actual 
preparation  of  the  legislative  program  is  a  matter  for  conjecture. 

When  the  committees  had  completed  their  joint  work  on  the 
appropriation  bill,  their  measure  was  introduced  in  the  senate, 
April  5.  In  the  assembly,  on  the  following  day,  April  6,  the 
appropriation  bill  (Whitman  bill)  was  reported  amended  to 
second  reading.  This  procedure,  in  fact,  meant  a  substitution  of 
the  committee  bill  for  the  Whitman  bill.  According  to  the  records 
the  governor's  proposal  was  "reported  amended."  But  as  has 
been  pointed  out  in  the  preceding  chapter,  the  form  and  sub- 
stance of  the  bill  were  so  "amended"  as  to  amount  to  a  complete 
alteration  of  the  governor's  tentative  budget. 

The  appropriation  bill  was,  therefore,  really  introduced  in  the 
assembly  on  April  6,  when  it  received  its  second  reading,  con- 
sisting of  the  reading  of  the  bill  by  its  title  as  follows:  "An  act 
making  appropriations  for  the  support  of  government." 

The  following  legislative  day  was  Friday,  April  7.  Friday  is 
always  a  short  day  since  most  of  the  members  go  to  their  homes 
for  the  week-end  after  the  close  of  the  Thursday  session.  The 
assembly  uses  this  day  for  the  purpose  of  advancing  bills,  but 

51 


APPROPRIATIONS     IS     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 

by  agreement  the  point  of  a  quorum  is  not  raised,  and  action 
taken  on  any  measure,  which  is  not  agreeable  to  a  member,  is 
reconsidered  on  such  member's  request  the  following  week. 

The  next  legislative  day  was  Monday,  April  10.  This  is 
also  a  short  day  as  Monday's  sessions  are  always  in  the  evening, 
beginning  at  8:30  P.  M.  It  was  at  this  session  that  the  appro- 
priation bill  was  advanced  to  third  reading. 

The  bill  was  thus  on  the  order  of  second  reading  of  the  calendar 
on  the  two  short  session  days,  as  is  shown  above.  Under  the 
rules  of  the  assembly,  committee  of  the  whole  procedure  in  the 
form  of  unlimited  debate  takes  place  while  a  bill  is  on  the  order 
of  second  reading.  Although  the  appropriation  bill,  technically, 
was  on  the  order  of  second  reading  on  the  two  days  mentioned,  on 
these  two  days  the  sessions  were  not  of  such  a  character  as  to 
offer  opportunities  for  a  full  and  ample  debate  of  the  kind  that 
an  important  measure  like  the  appropriation  bill  should  receive. 
When  the  bill  was  reached  on  the  calendar  late  Monday  night 
(April  10),  it  was  advanced  to  third  reading  without  a  word  of 
criticism  or  explanation. 

On  April  11  and  12  the  appropriation  bill  was  on  the  calendar 
of  the  assembly  on  the  order  of  third  reading  or  final  passage. 
On  the  12th,  when  it  was  reached,  Mr.  Maier  moved  to  amend. 
This  motion  had  the  effect  of  removing  the  bill  from  the  calendar 
for  the  remainder  of  the  week,  until  some  minor  amendments 
could  be  added,  and  new  printed  copies  made  available.  The  new 
printed  copies  of  the  appropriation  bill  in  its  final  amended 
form,  A.  Pr.  2071,  were  ready  on  Monday,  April  17.  The  bill 
did  not  receive  any  consideration,  and  in  fact  it  could  not 
receive  any  consideration  in  the  assembly  until  it  was  reached 
on  the  calendar  at  9:43  P.  M.  on  Monday  night,  April  17,  only 
a  few  hours  after  it  was  made  available  in  its  final  amended  form 
and  within  a  few  days  of  the  end  of  the  session.  At  this  time 
occurred  the  only  debate  on  the  appropriation  bill  which  took 
place  during  the  entire  session  of  the  assembly — about  two  hours 
and  a  half  of  more  or  less  pertinent  commentary,  accomplishing 
no  visible  results.  At  12:14  A.  M.  the  majority  leader,  Mr. 
Adler,  moved  the  previous  question.  This  motion  had  the  effect 
of  cutting  off  further  debate  immediately.  The  motion  was  put 
and  carried.  The  speaker  then  said  "Third  reading  of  the 
bill."  The  clerk  replied  "An  act  making  appropriations  for  the 
support  of  government."  Then  the  speaker  interrupted,  saying 
"Read  the  last  section."     The  clerk  replied,  " Sec.  13.     This  act 

62 


CONSIDERATION    BY     THE     LEGISLATURE 


shall  take  effect  immediately."  The  speaker's  command  ''Call 
the  roll"  was  interrupted  by  cries  from  the  floor  of  the  assembly  of 
"party  vote,"  whereupon  the  clerk  employed  the  "short  roll  call" 
of  the  assembly,  that  is,  he  called  the  first  and  last  names  and  the 
names  of  the  "majority"  and  "minority"  leaders  and  announced 
"ayes  90,  noes  45."  Less  than  one  minute  after  the  previous 
question  was  moved  the  speaker  said  "The  bill  has  been  passed." 
Thus  the  appropriation  bill  imposing  a  charge  of  millions  of 
dollars  on  the  public  treasury  was  declared  passed  by  the  speaker 
of  the  assembly  at  12:15  A.  M.,  just  two  hours  and  thirty-two 
minutes  after  the  bill  was  brought  into  the  open  by  the  standing 
committee  for  the  consideration  of  the  representatives  of  the  people. 


Preliminary  Statement  by  the  Minority  Leaders 

Before  the  appropriation  bill  was  debated  Monday  night  (April 
17)  in  the  assembly,  the  minority  leaders  of  the  senate  and 
assembly  gave  out  a  joint  statement  to  the  press  which  presented 
the  Democratic  view  of  the  annual  appropriation  bill  for  1916.^ 
In  this  statement  the  Democratic  leaders  pointed  out  that  the 
Republican  party  had  increased  the  fixed  charges  of  the  state 
government  $7,134,000  in  the  last  two  years  without  any  con- 
structive legislation  to  show  for  it. 

The  two  leaders,  Mr.  Wagner  and  Mr.  Callahan,  strongly  con- 
tended that  the  increase  was  due  to  added  patronage  for  Republi- 
can office  holders.  The  list  of  departments  in  which  they  claimed 
these  increases  in  expenditures  had  been  made  was  as  follows : 

Executive  or  Governor's  department,  from  $72,200  in  1914 
to  $111,250  in  1916 

Secretary  of  State,  from  $329,330  to  $379,502 

Treasurer,  from  $36,650  to  $41,875 

Attorney  General,  from  $277,474  to  $368,570 

Excise,  from  $282,820  to  $348,475 

Health,  from  $257,940  to  $396,660 

Industrial  Commission,  from  $1,126,920  to  $1,200,784 

Public  Service  Commission,  from  $489,845  to  $495,  840 

Tax  Commission,  from  $189,200  to  $257,260 

Charities,  from  $2,855,320  to  $3,253,010. 
The  tabulation  attached  to  the  statement,  according  to  the 
press,  did  not  include  the  minor  departments  or  the  legislature. 
In  the  state  departments  covered,  the  minority  leaders  claimed 


^The  Albany  Knickerbocker  Press,  April  17, 1916. 

53 


APPROPRIATIONS     IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 

that  it  showed  "a  net  increase  of  $4,390,797,  in  1916,  over  1914, 
for  payrolls  and  patronage."^ 

The  Democratic  leaders  explained  that  the  difference  between 
the  $63,997,771.86  appropriation  of  1915  and  the  proposed  appro- 
priation of  $58,652,478.31  for  1916  was  nearly  all  accounted  for  in 
one  large  canal  construction  item  of  $3,654,000  which  was  unneces- 
sarily appropriated  last  year,  and  refunded  out  of  the  $27,000,000 
bond  issue.  In  this  statement  the  leaders  explained  that  to  the 
$3,654,000  should  be  added  "  $274,000  appropriated  for  special  con- 
struction, public  works,  $548,128  lapsed  activities,  $465,000  state 
census,  and  $590,000  excess  last  year  over  this  year  for  compensa- 
tion for  killed  cattle,  "or  a  total  of  $5,431,128,  which  wasmorethan 
the  difference  between  last  year's  and  this  year's  appropriations.* 

Messrs.  Wagner  and  Callahan  pointed  out  that  the  $58,652,- 
478.31  did  not  include  an  unknown  volume  of  special  appropria- 
tions, yet  to  be  made.^ 

They  also  stated  that  for  the  purely  administrative  purposes, 
that  is  to  say,  for  official  salaries,  office  expenses,  office  sup- 
plies, traveling  expenses  and  the  like,  the  total  appropriations 
in  1914,  under  Governor  Glynn,  were  $30,276,548.  In  1915,  under 
Governor  Whitman,  they  were  $32,883,188,  and  this  year  the 
appropriation  bill  carried  for  these  same  purposes  $35,410,856. 
Nor,  said  the  minority  leaders,  was  this  all,  because  according 
to  the  financial  statement  accompanying  the  bill  provision  "is 
made  for  reserve  for  estimated  obligations  against  unexpended 
balances  of  former  appropriations  at  June  30,  1916  of  $2,000,000. 
If  a  genuine  need  exists  to  incur  this  $2,000,000  obligation  be- 
fore the  end  of  the  present  fiscal  year,  June  30,  the  taxpayer 
ought  to  get  the  benefit  of  it  in  a  corresponding  reduction  of  the 
volume  of  appropriations  for  the  next  fiscal  year."  No  such 
reduction,  however,  has  been  made,  but  on  the  contrary  the 
appropriations  were  made  "for  the  full  fiscal  year,  beginning  July 
1,  to  cover  the  entire  twelve  months  period."  In  other  words, 
the  appropriation  bill  of  1916  "provided  for  administrative 
purposes  for  the  next  fiscal  year  by  an  appropriation  of 
$35,410,856  plus  $2,000,000  by  reserve  from  the  former  appro- 
priations, a  total  of  $37,410,856  "  as  against  the  total  of  1914  for 
precisely  the  same  purposes  of  $30,276,548.'* 

'The  Albany  Knickerbocker  Press,  April  17,  191G. 
^Ibid. 

'As  shown  on  p.  78,  the  total  miscellaneous  and  special  appropriations  of  the 
legislature  were  S2, 498, .300. 06. 

^The  Albany  Knickerbocker  Press,  April  19,  1916. 

54 


CONSIDERATION     BY     THE     LEGISLATURE 


Debate  on  the  Appropriation  Bill  in  the  Assembly 

The  debate  on  the  bill  in  the  assembly,  as  pointed  out  above, 
occurred  on  Monday  night,  April  17,  from  9:43  P.  M.  to  12:14 
A.  M.  The  first  speaker  was  Mr.  McEUigott.  He  criticised 
the  reduction  in  the  salary  of  the  ''  chief  of  the  bureau  of  accounts" 
from  $3000  to  $2000. 

Mr.  Hamilton  Fish  consumed  twelve  minutes  in  forcing  con- 
sideration of  a  supply  bill  item  of  $9,217.86  for  payment  of 
services  to  Mr.  James  W.  Osborne  as  special  deputy  attorney 
in  the  investigation  of  charges  respecting  the  management  of 
Sing  Sing  prison  "some  years  ago."  Mr.  Adler,  the  majority 
leader,  answered  that  the  service  was  rendered  in  1914,  and  was  a 
valid  claim.  Mr.  Fish  moved  to  strike  out  the  item.  On  a 
rising  vote  of  the  assembly  preceded  by  a  "  close  call  of  the  house" 
Mr.  Fish's  motion  was  lost  by  a  vote  of  30  to  45. 

At  10:19  P.  M.  Mr.  Callahan,  the  minority  leader,  was  recog- 
nized. Mr.  Callahan's  speech  followed  the  lines  of  the  joint 
statement  referred  to  above,  p.  53,  printed  in  the  morning  papers 
of  the  same  day. 

The  "minority  leader"  started  his  speech  by  explaining  the 
form  of  the  appropriation  bill  as  compared  with  the  finance  bills 
of  previous  years.     Continuing,  he  stated : 

1 — That    the    bills    (general,    supply,    construction,    reap- 

propriation)  were  under  the  same  cover 
2 — That  the  bill  was  only  a  partially  itemized  bill 
3 — That  the  increases  in  fixed  or  overhead  charges  over 

1914  were  $7,134,000 
4 — That  in  reality  the  bill  contained  increases  in  the  over- 
head charges  over  the  1915  bill  of  $4,527,668,  of  which 
$1,861,000  was  in  the  increased  cost  of  administration 
alone 
5 — That  he  was  wondering  how  this  increase  was  to  be  jus- 
tified when  it  had  been  stated  that  the  $63,000,000  ap- 
propriation  of    1915    was    because    of    the    Democratic 
deficiency  of  $11,000,000  of  1914 
6 — That  he  proposed  to  show  by  a  comparative  table,  clas- 
sified by  departments  what  the  increases  were  over  the 
1914  and  the  1915  bills. 
According  to  Mr.  Callahan  some  of  the  increases    were  as 
follows : 

Executive  department — an  increase  of  $39,000   over  1914 
and  of  $20,700  over  1915 


APPROPRIATIONS    IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 

Secretary  of  state— S50,000  increase  over  1914  and  $18,000 

over  1915 
Comptroller— $12,000  reduction  over  1914 
Treasurer — $5,225  increase  over  1914 

Civil  service— $2,360  increase  over  1914  and  $5,500  over  1915 
Judiciary— $7,000  increase  over  1914  and  $83,000  over  1915 
Excise — $65,000  increase  over  1914 
Health    department — $138,000    increase    over    1914    and 

$80,000  over  1915 
Industrial    commission — $73,000    increase    over    1914    and 

$9,000  over  1915 
Public  Service— $6,000  increase  over  1914  and  $10,000  over 

1915 
Tax  commission — $68,000  increase  over  1914 
Weights  and  measures — $500  increase  over  1914  and  1915 

and  1916  appropriation  identical 
Education  department — $946,000  increase  over   1914  and 

$800,000  over  1915 
Agriculture  department — $132,000  increase  over  1914  and 

$160,000  over  1915 
Defensive— $371,000  increase  over  1914  and  $296,000  over 

1915  (exclusive  of  special  mobilization  appropriation  of 

$500,000) 
Insane— $1,044,000  increase  over  1914  and  $846,000  over 

1915 
Conservation— $73,000  increase  over  1914  and  $127,000  over 

1915 
Highways— $239,000  increase  over  1914 
Canals— $32,000  increase  over  1914  and  $344,000  over  1915 

The  "minority  leader"  also  stated  what,  in  his  opinion,  ac- 
counted for  some  of  the  increases.  He  said  "throughout  the 
construction  bill  were  scattered  numerous  items  for  'work  and 
labor'  totaling  $476,534.  These  are  similar  items  to  those  termed 
last  year  'for  extraordinary  repairs'  which  the  governor  cut  out 
of  the  bill.  The  real  reason  for  these  items  which  are  not  item- 
ized, is  to  provide  a  fund  to  supply  pohtical  jobs  in  districts  of 
favored  members."^ 

Mr.  Callahan  also  pointed  out  three  large  lump-sum  deficiency 
items  in  the  supply  bill,  which,  in  his  opinion,  should  have  been 


'Dispatch  to  New  York  Times,  April  IS,  191G.  Examples  of  the  items  re- 
ferred to  above  are  a  lump  sum  appropriation  of  $179,500  (Appropriation 
Bill,  p.  599,  line  25)  and  another  of  $190,000  (p.  600,  line  25). 

66 


COXSIDERATION     BY     THE     LEGISLATURE 


itemized.  These  items  were  $155,135.44  ''for  board  for  pris- 
oners in  penitentiaries,  for  deficiencies  prior  to  June  30,  1916"; 
$157,548.95,  for  payment  of  claims  for  diseased  cattle  "killed 
prior  to  March  1,  1916";  and  $100,000  for  rearranging  the  ground 
plans  of  the  permanent  state  fair  grounds.^ 

In  closing  his  speech  at  11 :50  P.  M.  the  leader  of  the  minority 
charged  the  framers  of  the  bill  with  including  lump  sum  appro- 
priations in  the  appropriation  bill  in  those  cases  where  such  sums 
could  be  used  for  patronage  purposes. 

Mr.  Maier,  the  chairman  of  the  ways  and  means  committee, 
took  just  fifteen  minutes  to  reply  to  the  attacks  of  the  minority. 
He  explained  an  increase  of  $6,450  in  the  executive  department 
for  a  budget  bureau  by  stating  that  this  sum  would  be  "necessary 
under  the  new  Sage  budget  procedural  act."  The  total  of  the 
increases  in  the  appropriation  bill,  he  said,  was  $10,903,000. 
"The  1916  bill  carried  for  grade  crossings  $175,000;  in  1914 
there  was  no  appropriation  for  this  purpose.  He  justified  an 
increase  of  $250,000  in  the  compensation  commission  budget; 
he  said  that  the  increase  of  $800,000  for  the  educational  depart- 
ment went  for  State  scholarships  and  more  teachers;  an  increase 
of  $55,000  for  normal  schools  he  credited  to  growth  in  popula- 
tion; of  the  $300,000  increase  for  the  agricultural  department, 
$200,000  was  paid  for  animals  slaughtered  because  of  disease, 
and  the  remainder  was  for  a  new  school  at  Cobleskill;  an  increase 
of  $1,640,000  for  highway  maintenance  was  charged  to  increased 
mileage;  $330,000  more  for  canals  was  accounted  for  by  more 
canals  and  greater  efficiency,  and  an  appropriation  of  $2,670,000 
more  for  the  sinking  fund,  he  said,  was  mandatory.  A  total  of 
these  increases  was  $10,903,000,  which  Mr.  Maier  thought 
accounted  in  full  for  the  growth  of  state  expenses  since  1914."  ^ 

Nevertheless  Mr.  Maier  contended,  that  there  was  an  actual 
saving  to  the  state  of  $3,825,049.19.  Here  is  the  way  he  ex- 
plained the  saving: 

"The  total  appropriations  of  1914  were  $47,899,522.74,  while 
the  total  for  this  year  is  $58,652,478.31,  or  an  increase  of  $10,752,- 
950.57.  From  this  must  be  deducted  the  difference  in  reap- 
propriations  amounting  to  $3,675,000,  leaving  an  actual  increase 
of  $7,077,951.57.  This  amount  deducted  from  the  itemized 
schedule  of  $10,903,000  shows  the  real  saving  in  the  maintenance 


'Appropriation  bill,  Assembly  Int.  281,  Printed  2071,  p.  544,  line  24;  p. 
558,  line  12;  and  p.  575,  line  5. 
2New  York  Times,  April  18,  1916. 

57 


APPROPRIATIONS    IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 

of  government  of  $3,825,049.43.  There  is  not  one  cent  that  can 
be  cut  out  of  this  bill.  The  big  increases  are  mainly  due  to  the 
increase  in  population  and  the  consequent  increases  in  the  ob- 
ligations of  the  government."^ 

In  a  ten-minute  speech,  Mr.  Adler,  the  majority  leader,  closed 
the  debate  on  the  bill.  He  said  that  he  was  familiar  with  some  of 
the  items  because  in  company  with  a  few  members  of  the  leg- 
islature he  had  visited  certain  of  the  institutions.  The  $150,000 
reappropriation  for  the  drill  hall  at  Cornell  was  necessary,  being 
the  balance  of  an  appropriation  made  two  years  previously.  Lump 
sum  appropriations  for  repairs  in  the  case  of  institutions  were 
necessary.  These  institutions  were  small  villages.  Conditions 
could  not  be  entirely  foreseen,  and  all  appropriations  itemized. 
The  number  and  amount  of  lump  sum  appropriations  had  been 
kept  down  to  the  lowest  figure.  It  was  unfair  to  attack  the  bill. 
It  was  unfair  to  give  a  wrong  impression  to  the  state.  The  bill 
was  "an  honest,  fair  and  carefully  made  up  appropriation  bill." 

Consideration  of  the  Appropriation  Bill  in  the  Senate 

On  April  5  the  appropriation  bill  was  introduced  in  the  sen- 
ate by  Mr.  Sage,  chairman  of  the  committee  on  finance.  The 
following  procedure,  the  so-called  first  and  second  reading  of  the 
bill,  took  place: 

President  of  the  Senate  :  "  First  reading  of  the  bill." 

Clerk  of  the  Senate:  "The  Senate  and  assembly  of  the 
state  of  New  York  do  enact  as  follows. "^ 

President  of  the  Senate:  "Second  reading  of  the  bill  by 
its  title." 

Clerk  of  the  Senate:  "An  act  making  appropriations  for 
the  support  of  government." 

President  of  the  Senate:  "Referred  to  the  committee  on 
finance." 


'New  York  Herald,  April  18,  1916.  The  Albany  Evening  Journal,  inter- 
preted the  facts  in  its  own  way,  on  April  18,  as  follows:  "In  the  assembly 
last  night,  minority  leader,  Joseph  M.  Callahan  charged  that  the  bill  showed 
an  increase  of  $7,134,000  over  the  last  appropriation  bill  framed  by  a  Demo- 
cratic administration  in  1914.  Assemblyman  William  J.  Maier,  chairman  of 
the  ways  and  means  committee,  together  with  Majority  Leader,  Simon  L. 
Adler  tore  l)ig  holes  in  his  argument  and  showed  that  there  is  really  a  saving  of 
$3,825,049.43  over  1914." 

2 The  constitution  of  the  state  (Art.  Ill,  §14)  states  that  "the  enacting 
clause  of  all  bills  shall  be  'The  People  of  the  State  of  New  York,  represented 
in  Senate  and  Assembly  do  enact  as  follows.'  "  In  the  hurry  and  rush  of  the 
session,  however,  the  clerk's  remarks,  which  serve  as  a  substitute  for  the 
first  reading  of  the  bill,  frequently  are  "Senate  and  Assembly  do  enact  as 
foUows." 

68 


CONSIDERATION    BY     THE     LEGISLATURE 


This  procedure  consumed  about  five  seconds  of  the  tmie  of  the 
senate.  While  it  did  not  place  the  bill  on  the  calendar  for  consider- 
ation, it  did  make  the  work  of  the  committee  public,  although  copies 
of  the  appropriation  bill  were  not  available  until  the  bill  was  printed. 

The  bill  remained  in  the  hands  of  the  finance  committee  from 
April  5  to  April  10.  On  Monday,  April  10,  the  appropriation 
bill  was  reported  to  the  senate  and  referred  to  the  committee 
of  the  whole.  In  other  words,  the  bill  was  placed  at  the  foot 
of  the  calendar  as  a  general  order. 

Under  the  rules  of  the  senate,  bills  on  order  of  third  reading 
are  taken  up  and  disposed  of  in  the  order  in  which  they  are 
advanced  to  third  reading.  General  orders  are  the  last  order  of 
business.  The  rules  provide  that  "after  the  reading  and  ap- 
proving of  the  journal,  the  order  of  business  shall  be  as  follows:" 

1 — The  presentation  of  petitions 

2 — Introduction  of  bills 

3 — Messages  from  the  assembly 

4 — Messages  from  the  governor 

5 — Reports  of  standing  committees 

6 — Reports  of  select  committees 

7 — Communications  and  reports  from  state  officers 

8 — Third  reading  of  bills 

9 — Motions  and  resolutions 
10 — Special  orders 
11 — General  orders  [committee  of  the  whole]. 

When  general  orders  are  reached,  the  senate  goes  into  com- 
mittee of  the  whole.  The  president  of  the  senate  calls  a  member 
of  the  senate  to  the  chair,  and  unlimited  debate  maj^  take  place. 

After  the  debate  and  decision,  without  a  roll  call,  as  to  bills 
in  general  orders,  the  committee  of  the  whole  arises  and  reports 
its  decision  to  the  senate.  The  question  is  on  agreeing  to  the 
report  of  the  committee  of  the  whole.  The  committee  of  the 
whole  may  by  rising  vote  decide  to  strike  out  the  enacting  clause 
of  a  bill,  and  report  such  fact  to  the  senate.  Each  bill  which 
receives  favorable  action  in  the  committee  of  the  whole  comes 
up  before  the  senate  automatically.  The  third  reacUng  calendar 
is  made  up  of  bills  advanced  in  this  way,  although  a  great  ma- 
jority of  bills  reported  favorably  by  the  standing  committees  are 
placed  on  the  third  reading  calendar  immediately  without  having 
to  run  the  ''general  orders"  gamut.  Bills  on  third  reading  are 
on  the  order  of  final  passage. 

Appropriation  Bill  in  the  Committee  of  the  Whole 

The  appropriation  bill  was  referred  to  the  committee  of  the 
whole  Monday,  April  10.     It  was  amended  on  the  12th.     The 
5  59 


APPROPRIATIONS     IN     LEGISLATURE.    SESSION     OF     1916 

motion  was:  "to  be  amended  as  indicated  and  retain  its  place 
on  the  calendar."  The  amended  copy  was  not  available  until 
the  following  Monday,  April  17.  Technically,  however,  the 
appropriation  bill  was  on  the  general  orders  or  committee  of  the 
whole  calendar  April  11,  12,  13,  14,  15  and  17.  This  does  not 
mean  that  there  was  opportunity  to  discuss  the  appropriation 
bill  on  each  of  these  days.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  senate  went 
into  the  general  orders  calendar  on  only  one  of  these  days,  viz., 
April  13.  After  the  13th  one  more  of  the  many  invisible  ways 
resorted  to,  to  kill  a  bill  was  to  refer  bills  reported  to  general 
orders.  It  was  generally  agreed  that  the  13th  of  April  would  be 
the  last  day  on  which  the  senate  would  go  into  the  general  orders 
calendar,  and  thus  bills  referred  to  the  committee  of  the  whole 
would  die  without  a  struggle.  It  will  be  shown  further  on  how 
the  appropriation  bill  was  brought  out  of  general  orders. 

The  appropriation  bill  was  amended  on  the  12th.  When  it  came 
up  on  the  13th  nobody,  except  the  parties  to  the  secret,  knew  to 
what  extent  it  had  been  amended,  and  the  bill,  No.  537,  on  the  gen- 
eral orders  calendar,  was  skipped  until  on  Monday  night,  April  17, 
when  the  "majority  leader,"  Mr.  Brown,  suddenly  asked  for  unan- 
imous consent  to  consider  it.  The  amended  copy  had  only  been 
available  a  few  hours,  and  members  stated  that  they  were  not  yet 
prepared  to  discuss  and  vote  on  it.  Mr.  Brown  then  asked  for  unan- 
imous consent  to  take  the  bill  out  of  the  general  orders  calendar 
and  advance  it  to  third  reading.  "Without  objection  it  is  so  or- 
dered" was  the  ruling  of  the  chair,  and  the  bill  was  advanced. 

The  understanding,  however,  was  that  the  appropriation  bill 
would  be  debated  the  first  thing  on  Tuesday  morning,  April  18. 
The  third  reading  number  of  the  bill  was  1001.  When  the  senate 
met  Tuesday  morning,  however,  other  bills  claimed  its  attention 
and  it  was  not  until  3:31  P.  M.  that  Senator  Brown,  the  majority 
leader,  asked  that  the  bill  be  taken  up  out  of  its  regular  order. 
Mr.  Bennett  was  recognized. 

Limitations  under  Which  the  Debate  Occurred 

It  has  been  shown  how  the  appropriation  bill  was  suddenly 
called  up  out  of  its  regular  order  while  still  in  the  committee  of 
the  whole,  and  advanced  to  third  reading  without  discussion. 
When  the  bill  finally  came  up  for  consideration  the  senate  was 
working  under  "gag  rules"  which  had  been  introduced  on  April 
11.  Whether  the  majority  leader  feared  a  filibuster  or  not,  or 
whether  it  was  felt  that  thirty  minutes  was  sufficient  time  for 

60 


CONSIDERATION    BY     THE     LEGISLATURE 


any  senator  to  talk  on  the  bill  was  not  disclosed  at  the  time  these 
rules  were  brought  in.  It  is  significant,  however,  that  they  were 
introduced  at  an  early  date.  The  exact  text  of  the  resolution 
was  as  follows: 

''Resolved,  That  the  following  rule  be  adopted  by  the 
Senate  as  a  rale  of  procedure,  until  the  adjournment  of  the 
Legislature:  That  when  any  bill,  resolution  or  motion  is 
under  consideration,  it  shall  be  in  order  at  any  time  for  any 
senator  to  move  to  close  debate,  and  the  president  shall 
immediately  recognize  the  senator  who  wishes  to  make  such 
motion;  provided  however,  that  upon  the  apportionment 
bill  as  reported  by  the  committee  and  the  annual  appropria- 
tion bill  such  motion  shall  not  be  made  until  after  such  bill 
has  been  under  consideration  for  two  hours  assigned  by  the 
president  pro  tern,  and  t^YO  hours  assigned  by  the  minority 
leader.  Such  motion  shall  not  be  amended  or  debatable  and 
shall  be  immediately  put  and,  if  it  shall  receive  the  affirma- 
tive votes  of  a  majority  of  the  senators  present,  the  pending 
measure,  motion  or  resolution  shall  take  precedence  over 
all  other  business.  After  a  motion  to  close  debate  has  been 
made  by  any  senator,  no  other  motion  shall  be  in  order  until 
such  motion  has  been  voted  upon  by  the  senate.  After 
the  senate  shall  have  adopted  the  motion  to  close  debate,  as 
hereinbefore  provided,  no  motion  shall  be  in  order  but  one 
of  the  following  motions, — to  adjourn,  call  of  the  senate  and 
a  motion  to  commit,  which  motions  shall  be  immediately 
put  to  a  vote  of  the  senate  without  debate.  All  incidental 
questions  of  order  or  motions  pending  at  the  time  such  motion 
is  made  to  close  debate,  Vvdiether  the  same  be  on  appeal  or 
otherwise,  shall  be  decided  without  debate  and  all  motions 
made  after  such  motion  to  close  debate,  shall  be  non-debat- 
able. After  the  senate  shall  have  adopted  the  motion  to 
close  debate  as  hereinbefore  provided,  the  vote  shall  there- 
upon be  taken  upon  such  bill,  motion  or  resolution  with  such 
amendments  as  may  be  pending  at  the  time  of  such  motion 
according  to  the  rules  of  the  senate  but  without  further 
debate  except  that  am^  senator  who  may  desire  so  to  do, 
shall  be  permitted  at  the  time  his  name  is  called  to  speak 
not  more  than  two  minutes. 

"Should  a  motion  to  adjourn  be  carried,  the  measure  under 
consideration  shall  be  the  pending  ciuestion  when  the  senate 
shall  again  convene  and  shall  be  taken  up  at  the  point  where 
it  was  at  the  time  of  such  adjournment.  The  motion  to 
close  debate  may  be  ordered  upon  a  single  motion,  a  series 
of  motions  allowable  under  the  rule,  or  an  amendment  or 
amendments,  or  may  be  made  to  embrace  all  authorized 
motions  or  amendments  and  include  the  bill,  resolution  or 
motion  with  such  amendments  as  may  be  pending  to  its 
final  passage  or  rejection. 

61 


APPROPRIATIONS    IN    LEGISLATURE,    SESSION    OF    1916 

"No  senator  shall  speak  more  than  thh'ty  minutes  on  any 
pending  question. " 

The  Interpretation  of  the  "Gag  Rules" 

Senator  Bennett  began  the  debate  on  the  appropriation  bill 
at  3:31  P.  M.  Tuesdaj^,  April  18.  He  had  only  been  speaking  a 
few  seconds  when  the  following  interruption  took  place : 

Senator  Brown:  INIr.  President,  under  the  rules  the  time  is  limited  to 
two  hours  on  a  side  and  we  would  like  to  know  how  we  are  to  apportion  the 
time  of  the  Senator. 

Senator  Bennett:  Mr.  President,  my  understanding  from  what  the 
Senator  from  the  2Sth  said  was  that  we  were  to  discuss  it  today  and  tomorrow. 
I  did  not  understand  you  were  going  to  pass  it  now. 

Senator  Brown:  No,  we  are  not  going  to  pass  it  yet;  it  is  not  discussion 
on  final  passage.  When  the  minority  is  ready  they  can  discuss  it.  I  am  not 
doing  this  to  interfere  with  the  Senator  from  the  ISth,  but  unless  we  have  some 
plan  we  are  apt  to  run  into  an  indefinite  talk. 

Senator  Bennett:  I  am  not  going  to  talk  very  long. 

Senator  Brown:  I  want  j^ou  to  have  the  opportunity. 

Senator  Bennett:  I  understand  then  that  what  I  have  to  say  is  not  part 
of  the  time  under  the  rule? 

President  Schoeneck:  The  Chair  desires  to  call  attention  of  the  Senate 
to  the  fact  that  the  special  rule  is  not  in  force  until  the  motion  is  made  to  close 
debate,  according  to  the  interpretation  laid  upon  the  special  rule  b}'  the  Chair 
— (interruption)  the  Chair  was  calling  the  Senator's  attention  to  the  fact  that 
under  his  interpretation  of  the  rule  that  limitation  of  time  for  discussion  of  the 
bill  does  not  take  effect  until  the  motion  to  close  debate  has  been  carried. 

Senator  Wagner:  Then  there  are  two  hours  after  that? 

President  Schoeneck:  According  to  the  Chair's  interpretation  of  that 
there  are  two  hours  to  be  apportioned  to  the  majority  and  two  hours  appor- 
tioned to  the  minority. 

Senator  Argetsinger:  That  does  not  take  effect  until  some  one  has 
moved  to  close  debate? 

President  Schoeneck:  Yes,  and  that  motion  carries. 

Senator  Walters:  Mr.  President,  I  desire  to  submit  to  the  Chair  a  differ- 
ent interpretation. 

[Here  followed  considerable  discussion  with  reference  to  the  special  rules.] 

Senator  Bennett:  Now,  Mr.  President,  the  Senator  from  the  28th  stated 
yesterday  that  he  would  like  to  have  this  bill  advanced  to  third  reading  with 
the  understanding  that  it  be  debated  today  and  tomorrow.  Now  that  rule 
onlj'  applies  on  final  passage. 

[Some  more  discussion  with  reference  to  the  rule.] 

President  Schoeneck:  The  Senator  will  proceed. 

On  Wednesday  morning  Mr.  Bennett  again  encountered  the 
rule  limiting  debate,  and  as  is  shown  by  the  following  report  of 
the  encounter  the  Senator  felt  somewhat  aggrieved  at  the  atti- 
tude of  the  presicHng  offi.cer: 

The  Chair:  Under  the  rule  of  thirty  minutes,  he  has  but  two  minutes  more. 

Senator  Bennett:  Who  raised  the  point  of  order? 

The  Chairman:  The  Chair  is  enforcing  the  rule. 

Senator  Bennett:  I  ask  unanimous  consent. 

The  Chair:  Senator  Bennett  asks  unanimous  consent  to  extend  his  time 
bej'ond  the  half  hour. 

Senator  Brown:  All  right. 

Senator  Sage:  I  would  like  to  ask  the  Senator  from  the  ISth  a  question: 
Where  has  he  found  the  toothbrushes  and  eye-glasses  in  this  bill? 

62 


CONSIDERATION     BY     THE     LEGISLATURE 


The  Chairman  :  The  question  is  on  the  proposition  of  unanimous  consent. 

.Sexator  Bennett:  I  withdraw  that,  Mr.  Chairman,  and  move  to  recom- 
mit the  bill,  and  on  that  motion  I  would  like  to  be  heard. 

The  Chairman:  Senator  Bennett  moves  to  recommit  the  bill.  Without 
unanimous  consent  the  Senator  is  entitled  to  discuss  the  motion  for  two  minutes. 

Senator  Bennett:  Very  well,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  Brown:  Mr.  President,  I  ask  unanimous  consent  for  the  Senator 
from  the  18th  to  proceed. 

The  Chairman:  The  Chair  desires  to  know  what  extension  the  Senator 
is  to  be  granted? 

Senator  Sage  :  In  view  of  the  fact  that  we  are  waiting  now  for  the  sheets 
from  the  comptroller's  office,  I  ask  that  this  be  made  indefinite. 

The  Chairman:  Is  there  objection  to  unanimous  consent?  Without  ob- 
jection, the  Senator  will  proceed. 

Senator  Bennett:  Now,  the  objection  of  the  presiding  officer  having 
been  removed,  I  will  continue. 

Time  Actually  Consumed  in  Consideration  of  the  Bill 

The  debate  on  the  appropriation  bill  in  the  senate  began  at 
3:31  P.  M.  Tuesday,  April  18.  At  1:00  P.  M.  Wednesday, 
April  19,  the  bill  was  declared  passed,  by  a  vote  of  thirty-five 
ayes  and  fifteen  noes,  after  a  ''close  call"  of  the  senate  and  a 
"long  roll  call. "  During  this  time,  however,  the  bill  was  actually 
under  consideration  four  hours  and  forty-nine  minutes,  not 
including  the  few  minutes  taken  for  the  roll  call. 

Although  Senator  Bennett  began  speaking  at  3:31  P.  M.,  some 
of  his  time  was  consumed  in  the  discussion  with  respect  to  the 
interpretation  of  the  "gag  rules"  referred  to  on  page  62.  At 
3:50  P.  M.,  the  senate  took  a  recess,  until  5:30  P.  M.  in  order 
that  the  Republican  members  of  the  senate  and  assembly  might 
caucus  on  the  budget  or  additional  revenue  measures  yet  to  be 
passed.^  A  recess  was  eventually  taken  until  8:35  P.  M.,  at 
which  time  Senator  Bennett  continued  his  speech. 

At  9:16  P.  M.  Senator  Wagner,  the  opposition  leader,  was 

recognized.  Senator  Sage  at  10:05  and  Senator  Brown  at  10:32. 

Following  a  twenty  minute  speech  of  the  "majority  leader," 

Senator  Wagner  made  a  short  reply  of  fifteen  minutes,  after 

which  the  following  discussion,  throwing  light  on  the  attendance 

at  this  important  debate,  ensued: 

Senator  Brown:  Now,  Mr.  President,  I  am  perfectly  willing  in  view  of  the 
-profound  interest  of  all  the  members  of  the  senate  in  this  discussion,  to  continue 
it  tomorrow.  It  was  my  intention — I  called  it  up  for  discussion  last  night,  and 
nobody  was  ready  to  discuss  it.     We  are  here  to  discuss  it  now.     If  anybody 


desires  to  continue  the  discus.sion  tomorrow,  it  will  be  held  over  and  not  passed 
until  tomorrow.  One  single  man  will  save  the  city  from  destruction.  Is  there 
such  a  Senator? 

Senator  Bennett:  I  suggest  that  it  go  over  until  tomorrow. 

Senator  Brown:  I  will  agree  .  .  .  Mr.  President,  but  it  may  lie  over 
and  notify  the  senators  who  are  sleeping  that  it  will  lie  over. 


1  Liquor  tax  of  twenty-five  per  cent,  see  page  50. 

63 


APPROPRIATIONS     IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 

The  following  morning,  Wednesday,  April  19,  the  senate  met 
at  10:30  A.  M.  Senator  Bennett  obtained  the  floor  and  held  it 
for  almost  an  hour  and  a  half.  During  this  time  there  were  many 
interruptions  and  delays.  The  most  significant  thing  about  this 
session  was  that  the  men  who  really  knew  how  the  appropriation 
bill  was  put  together  were  asked  to  step  in  on  the  floor  of  the 
senate  and  answer  questions  put  by  Senators  Bennett  and  Wag- 
ner. These  men  were  Deputy  Comptroller  Reusswig  and  his 
assistant,  Mr.  Boone.  Since  Senator  Bennett's  questions  ap- 
peared to  be  too  technical  for  the  chairman  of  the  finance  com- 
mittee to  handle,  the  answers  of  the  experts  were  awaited  with 
profound  interest  bj^  the  press  and  the  galleries.  While  the 
replies  of  Mr.  Reusswig  and  his  assistant  were  frequently  inaudi- 
ble, it  was  evident  that  they  were  satisfactory  and  that  much 
light  was  thrown  upon  the  intricate  problem  of  state  finance  by 
the  new  procedure.^  At  12:30  P.  M.  the  debate  was  brought 
to  a  close.  Senator  Brown  moved  a  "close  call"  of  the  senate, 
and  later  a  "long  roll  call."  The  last  section  of  the  appropria- 
tion bill  was  read  viz.  "Section  13.  This  act  shall  take  effect 
immediately."  The  roil  was  called  and  at  1:00  P.  M.  the  ap- 
propriation bill  was  declared  passed  by  a  party  vote  of  35  to  15.^ 


1  The  text  of  this  interesting  discussion  is  given  on  pages  127  and  131. 

'•^  The  appropriation  bill  was  passed  by  the  senate  Wednesday,  April  19. 
The  regular  and  supplemental  calendar  of  this  day  contained  182  bills  on  order 
of  third  reading.  The  session  began  at  10:30  A.  M.  The  first  two  hours  were 
taken  up  with  the  final  debate  and  passage  of  the  appropriation  bill  at  1:00 
P.  M.  A  bill  providing  for  registered  nurses  occupied  a  greater  part  of  the 
time  during  the  afternoon  session  and  the  apportionment  bill,  upon  which 
Senator  Wagner  spoke  for  an  hour  and  a  half,  took  up  the  greater  portion  of 
the  early  part  of  the  all-night  session,  which  lasted  until  6:30  A.  M.  It  was 
from  midnight  of  this  session  until  6:30  A.  M.,  that  nearly  all  of  the  182 
bills  on  the  calendar  received  their  scant  attention.  Twenty-one  of  these 
bills  were  put  over  to  April  20.  One  hundred  and  sixty-one  of  them  were 
considered  and  at  least  100  of  this  number  were  passed  during  the  latter  part 
of  this  all-night  session,  that  is,  early  Thursday  morning,  April  20. 

It  might  be  difficult  for  the  reader  who  has  never  seen  a  legislature  in  action 
to  understand  how  100  bills  could  be  passed  in  a  few  hours.  That  the  bills 
could  be  read  the  third  time,  the  roll  called  100  times  and  the  bills  debated 
in  the  six  and  one  half  hours  from  midnight  to  6:30  A.  M.  might  perhaps  be 
doubted  by  the  uninitiated.  The  fact  is,  that  a  stop  watch  was  held  by  the 
present  writer  during  the  rush  period  from  3:30  to  5:30  A.  M.  when  Senator 
Walters  occupied  the  chair.  At  one  time  the  v\-atch  showed  twelve  bills  passed 
in  two  minutes,  without  a  voice  being  raised  from  the  floor.  At  rhythmic 
intervals  was  heard  the  sonorous  voice  of  the  senator  acting  as  presiding  officer 
announcing,  "the  bill  has  been  passed,"  with  from  onl}^  seven  to  twelve  sec- 
onds intervening  between  the  time  it  was  called  up  and  the  time  it  was  declared 
passed  by  the  chair.  At  times  the  pace  was  so  fast  that  the  sleepy  senators 
found  it  difficult  to  turn  the  pages  of  the  calendar  fast  enough  to  keep  up. 
There  can  be  no  question  but  that  bills  were  passed  during  this  session  which 
had  not  been  studied  or  even  read  by  more  than  a  handful  of  senators. 

At  one  time  during  this  "speed  contest"  Senator  Wellington,  who  con- 

64 


CONSIDERATION     BY     THE     LEGISLATURE 


The  average  attendance  of  senators  during  the  debate  on  the 
bill  was  twenty-four.  A  tabulation  showing  the  time  consumed 
and  the  number  of  senators  actually  in  the  cham.ber  at  the  begin- 
ning of  each  senator's  speech  follows: 

TUESDAY,    APRIL    IS 


SENATORS 

TIME 

NUMBER   PRESENT 

Bennett 

3:31-  3:50  P.  M. 

8:35-  9:15  P.  M. 

9:16-10:05  P.  M. 
10:52-11:07  P.  M. 
10:05-10:32  P.  M. 
10:32-10:52  P.  M. 

19 

Bennett 

Wagner 

25 
19' 

Wagner 

19 

Sage 

Brown 

20 
19 

WEDNESDAY,    APRIL    19 

Bennett 

Bennett 

Bennett 

Wagner 

10:30-12:10  P.  M. 
12:25-12:30 
12:35-12:39 
12:10-12:25 

3P 
31 
3P 
31 

scientiously  tried  to  follow  what  vras  going  on  and  who  frequently  received 
a  snub  for  his  independence,  called  attention  to  the  haste  with  which  bills 
were  being  passed.  A  bill  had  been  declared  passed  which  had  been  recently 
amended,  having  retained  its  place  on  the  calendar,  by  unanimous  consent. 
Not  a  senator  had  seen  the  amended  bill.  Wellington  claimed  that  the 
amended  bill  was  not  on  the  files  of  members.  Senators  Brown  and  Wellington 
inspected  the  bill  which  the  clerk  handed  down  to  them,  and  although  the 
latter  stated  that  he  Vv-as  not  satisfied  with  his  hastj'  inspection  of  the  bill,  it 
was  not  reconsidered,  and  the  race  through  the  remainder  of  the  calendar 
was  continued. 

In  order  to  understand  how  a  bill  can  receive  its  third  reading  and  be  passed 
in  a  few  seconds,  the  actual  procedure  will  be  set  forth. 

The  President:  Third  reading  of  the  liill. 

The  Clerk:  Third  reading  No.  560,  by  Mr.  Walker,  an  act  to  amend  the 
civil  rights  law,  in  relation  to  right  of  appeal. 

The  President:  Read  the  last  section. 

The  Clerk:  Section  2.     This  act  shall  take  effect  immediately. 

The  President:  Call  the  roll. 

The  Clerk:  Argetsinger,  Brown,  Wagner,  Wilson,  Ayes  51,  Noes  0. 

The  President:  The  bill  has  been  passed. 

The  president  next  announces,  "Third  reading  of  the  bill,"  meaning  the 
next  bill  on  the  calendar  and  the  above  is  repeated. 

1  Following  majority  members  present  in  chamber:  Bennett,  Brown,  Mills, 
Sage,  Thompson,  Walters  and  Wicks. 

2  The  discussion  in  which  Deputj^  Comptroller  Reusswig  participated  took 
place  at  this  time.     There  was  some  delay  while  the  sheets  were  being  sent  for. 

'  Senator  Bennett  spoke  four  minutes  during  the  roll-call  under  the  two- 
minute  rule,  permitting  iSenators  to  explain  their  votes.  Senators  Emerson, 
Lawson,  Sage,  Thompson  and  Towner  also  availed  themselves  of  this  oppor- 
tunity. Senator  Emerson  said  that  the  appropriation  bill  was  the  "best  bill 
ever  put  up."  Senator  Thompson  said  that  for  the  first  time  everybody  had 
had  every  opportunity  to  find  out  what  was  in  the  bill  and  to  talk  on  it  freely; 
no  emergency  message  had  been  necessary;  they  had  found  out  that  they 
could  get  along  without  it;  the  bill  was  the  biggest  and  the  most  distinct 
advance  made  in  years. 

65 


APPROPRIATIONS     IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 


u 


Total  Time  the  Bill  was  under  Discussion 

NAME    OF    SENATOR  TOTAL    TIME 

Bennett 2  hours,  48  min.^ 

Brown 20 

Sage 27 

Wagner 1  hour,    19     " 

Total 4  hours,  54  min. 

Debate  on  the  Appropriation  Bill  in  the  Senate 
An  analysis  of  notes  taken  during  the  debate  and  the  minutes 
published  on  pages  100  to  134  would  seem  to  show  that  only  a 
few  members  of  the  senate  had  made  a  dihgent  study  of  the 
finance  measures  of  the  legislative  session  of  1916. 

In  view  of  the  fact  that  the  senate  debate  on  such  an  important 
measure  is  made  available  in  full  in  the  appendix,  it  seems 
unnecessary  here  to  do  more  than  to  summarize  the  points 
raised  by  the  participants  in  it. 

Senator  Bennett: 

Chief  among  the  four  members  who  took  part  in  the  debate 
was  Senator  Bennett  of  New  York  City.  Among  the  many 
things  Mr.  Bennett  brought  to  the  attention  of  the  senate  were 
the  following: 

1 — That  notwithstanding  an  estimated  surplus  of  $10,000,000 
the  actual  appropriations  for  the  fiscal  year  would  exceed 
the  actual  revenues  for  the  fiscal  year  by  more  than  S13,- 
446,000.2  Senator  Sage  admitted  the  fact,  but  stated 
that  there  were  three  measures  pending  which  would 
increase  the  revenue.^ 
2 — That  Part  VI  of  the  appropriation  bill  had  not  been 
totaled  up.''  While  this  part  contained  the  re-appro- 
priations, in  so  far  as  such  re-appropriations  were  for  the 
general  purposes  of  government  a  re-appropriation  was 

1  As  the  minutes  of  the  de])ate  (see  pa^e  100)  show,  a  great  many  interrup- 
tions took  place,  so  that  while  Senator  Bennett  technically  had  the  floor  for 
two  hours  and  forty-eight  minutes,,  in  reality  at  least  forty-eight  mmutes  of 
this  time  was  "yielded"  to  other  senators. 

2  See  "pink  sheets, "  above,  p.  50. 

Total  budget  appropriations,     $.58,652,478.31 

Total  indirect  revenues,  45,206,758.18  . 

'  Ibid.     The  25  per  cent  increase  in  the  excise  tax  was  passed.     Estimated 
revenue  from  this  source  was  $3,750,000. 
*  Ibid. 

66 


CONSIDERATION     BY     THE     LEGISLATURE 


"an  appropriation  just  as  much  as  anything  else."  Ex- 
clusive of  the  re-appropriations  coming  out  of  the  Canal 
and  Highway  fund,  $554,000  was  being  reappropriated 
which  should  be  included  in  the  "pink  sheet"  totals.  Mr. 
Bennett  claimed  that  the  legislature  was  therefore  actually 
spending  $14,000,000  more  than  the  revenue.  That  was  not 
all,  because  already  separate,  special  and  local  bills  passed 
or  to  be  passed  to  the  amount  of  "between  two  and  three 
minions  would  have  to  be  added  to  the  814,000,000.  "^ 
But  calling  the  difference  of  the  excess  of  appropriations 
over  revenues  $13,446,000,  take  out  the  $10,000,000  surplus 
and  the  deficit  is  $3,299,000.2 

Adding  the  $2,000,000  on  outside  bills  and  the  balance 
to  be  provided  is  $5,299,000.  Assuming  that  all  of  the 
measures  providing  additional  revenue  tax,  new  revenue  are 
passed  viz.,  $6,850,000  and  there  would  be  left  in  the  treas- 
ury at  the  end  of  the  year  about  $1,500,000.^  Senator 
Bennett  also  called  attention  to  the  fact  that  the  motor 
vehicle  tax  bill,  providing  that  the  state  return  one-half  of 
such  tax  to  the  localities,  had  been  passed.  The  total  was 
estimated  at  $2,673,000  in  the  "pink  sheets."  One  half 
of  this  sum,  $1,336,500,  wipes  out  your  bank  balance  of 
$1,500,000,  said  Senator  Bennett.^ 

3— That  in  addition  to  the  $16,000,000  to  be  appropriated 
in  excess  of  actual  indirect  revenues,  the  legislature  was 
about  to  embark  on  an  ambitious  plan  for  the  relief  of 
New  York  City  requiring  that  several  million  dollars  be 
taken  out  of  the  treasury  of  the  state  and  paid  into  the 
city  treasury  and  also  that  several  millions  be  taken  off 
the  city  and  put  over  on  the  state.     "To  add  those  to 


^  See  p.  78  for  table  showing  that  separate,  local,  special  and  miscellaneous 
bills  were  passed  totaling  .$2,498,300.06.  Senator  Sage  admitted  that  the  total 
of  such  bills  would  be  $1,900,000  (seepage  101).  It  was  stated  on  the  following 
day  that  the  reason  why  the  re-appropriations  had  not  been  footed  up  was 
that  they  were  included  in  the  $2,000,000  reserve  for  "estimated  obligations." 
See  "pink  sheets,"  p.  .50. 

^  See  "pink  sheets,"  p.  50,  "balance  to  be  provided." 

'  Only  one  measure,  the  25  per  cent  excise  surtax,  was  passed.  This  was 
estimated  to  provide  $.3,750,000,  which,  added  to  the  actual  revenues,  $45,206- 
758.18,  and  the  estimated  surplus,  $10,146,055.74,  or  $59,102,813.92,  indicates 
that  unless  the  governor  uses  the  veto  freely  the  legislature,  by  making  total 
appropriations  of  $61,150,778.37,  actually  appropriated  $2,047,964.45  in 
excess  of  the  actual  revenues  (funds  for  $385,681.25  of  the  $2,047,964.45  have 
been  set  aside,  being  re-appropriations)  and  the  $10,000,000  surplus  combined. 
See  table  p.  77,  and  "pink  sheets, "  p.  50.  Senator  Sage  estimated  $500,000  in 
vetoes  from  the  governor  on  the  36  thirtv-day  bills  (see  p.  108). 

*  See  pages  108-9. 

67 


APPROPRIATIONS     IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 

the  appropriation  bills,"  said  Senator  Bennett,  "you 
have  the  result  that  there  is  a  possibility  that  the  appro- 
priations will  exceed  the  revenue  somewhere  between 
twenty  and  twenty-five  millions,  as  against  which  we  have 
only  this  surplus  of  ten  millions  and  certain  measures,  at 
the  foot  of  the  sheet.  "^ 

4 — That  it  was  a  question  either  of  cutting  down  the  expenses 
or  imposing  a  direct  tax.  The  situation  had  to  be  faced 
and  should  be  met  by  "pruning  the  appropriations." 

5 — That  the  appropriation  bill  adopted  but  carried  out  in  a 
more  "cast-iron  form,  the  governor's  idea  of  a  segregated 
budget."  Not  only  were  the  items  of  the  bill  segregated 
to  a  much  greater  extent  than  the  executive  budget  but, 
continued  Senator  Bennett,  it  omitted  thp.t  part  of  the 
governor's  plan  which  made  the  segregated  budget  work- 
able, namely,  the  proAasion  which  gave  the  governor 
power  to  transfer  from  one  item  to  another.  "It  is  a 
well  known  fact  that  the  attempt  to  introduce  such  a 
budget  in  the  state  in  the  last  of  Glynn's  administration, 
which  plan  did  not  have  the  power  of  transfer,  brought 
about  a  very  disastrous  condition  in  one  of  the  departments, 
with  the  result  that  it  was  remedied  by  getting  the  comp- 
troller to  turn  his  back  while  an  indirect  method  was 
adopted  for  transferring  the  money  to  the  place  where  it 
was  needed.  If  we  are  going  to  adopt  a  segregated  budget, 
we  should  give  the  comptroller  or  the  governor  or  some- 
body the  power  to  make  the  transfer.  If  the  Budget 
Committee  appointed  by  the  bill  which  is  about  to  pass 
is  competent  to  make  up  the  budget,  it  is  competent  to 
make  the  transfer,  and  if  we  cannot  bring  ourselves  to 
giving  this  power  to  the  governor  or  to  the  comptroller 
or  someone  else,  give  it  to  the  Budget  Committee.  In 
my  opinion  that  would  not  be  the  best  solution.  My 
opinion  would  be  to  give  it  to  the  governor,  to  centralize 


1  The  senator  referred  to  the  i)eiuliii{i  measures  mentioned  at  bottom  of 
page  50.  The  program  for  the  relief  of  New  York  City  did  not  materiahze. 
A  number  of  the  "Brown  bills"  were  amended  in  the  assembly  to  take  effect 
next  year.  §.350,000,  the  city's  share  of  the  motor  vehicle  tax,  represents  the 
total  benefit  this  year.  In  1917,  however,  the  city  will  benefit  to  the  amount 
of  §1,000,000  its  share  of  the  25  per  cent  liquor  surtax  and  the  saving  of 
SGOOjOOO  on  the  state's  assumption  of  tiie  regulatory  expenses  of  the  Public 
Service  Commission.  In  addition  Section  178  of  the  Highway  Law  was 
repealed,  so  that  this  is  the  last  year  that  the  city  will  have  to  assume  68  per 
cent  of  the  appropriation  for  maintenance  of  county  roads.  See  editorial  New 
York  Tirnes,  April  20,  1010. 

68 


CONSIDERATIOX     BY     THE     LEGISLATURE 


the  power  of  government  in  the  executive;  but  it  ought 
to  be  lodged  in  someone,  otherwise,  we  will  have  an  un- 
workable budget. "  ^ 

6 — That  the  appropriation  bill,  Part  I,  was  3  per  cent  larger 
than  the  appropriation  bill  last  year  plus  the  supply  bill 
for  this  year.  Notwithstanding  consolidations  in  a  num- 
ber of  departments  which  had  l^een  made  last  year,  there 
was  an  increase  in  the  general  appropriation  bill  of  thirty- 
two  millions  last  year  to  thirty-five  millions  this  j^ear. 

7 — That  there  was  nothing  in  the  bill  to  prevent  officials 
from  exceeding  their  appropriations.  It  should  be  re- 
quired that  the  head  of  a  department  spend  onh^  one 
twelfth  of  the  appropriation  everj^  month.  Senator 
Brown  contended  that  his  bill  had  passed,  providing  that 
"a  special  report"  showing  wherein  the  official  had  ex- 
ceeded his  appropriation  and  the  reasons  therefor,  must 
be  filed  wath  the  comptroller  on  the  31st  day  of  January. 
If  the  official  had  exceeded  his  appropriations  and  did 
not  file  a  report,  the  comptroller  should  not  give  him  any 
more  money.  In  addition,  the  Hinman  bill  of  last  year 
made  it  a  misdemeanor  to  exceed.  Senator  Sage  said 
that  it  would  be  perfectly  impossible  and  unfa,ir  to  require 
officers  to  expend  onl}^  one  twelfth  of  their  appropriation 
every  month.  "The  expenses  vary  greatlj^  from  month 
to  month:  the  secretarj^  of  state's  offi.ce,  for  instance,  in 
issuing  licenses  to  automobiles.  During  the  time  w^ien 
this  is  done  the  offi.ce  is  very  busy.  In  the  summer,  when 
he  is  not  issuing  them,  there  is  not  that  condition.  You 
cannot  provide  for  this  thing.  That  was  one  trouble 
with  the  governor's  budget,  where  he  provided  for  one 
twelfth  of  the  year.  The  expenses  each  month  are  en- 
tirely different.     You  cannot  possibty  do  it  that  wa-y.''^ 

8 — That  appropriations  v/ere  included  in  the  bill,  which,  as 
separate  bills,  had  already  passed  the  legislature,  e.  g., 
§62,500  reappropriation  to  the  Plattsburgh  Centennial, 
page  628  of  the  appropriation  bill.^ 

9 — That  the  state  business  did  not  require  such  trem.endous 
expenditures  for  the  service  of  lawyers  as  the  bill  provided. 
In  addition  to  $20,000  in  salaries,  without  itemization, 


1  See  minutes  of  debate  pages  103 — 4. 

2  See  p.  10.3. 

3  Senate  Introductory  No.  892,  approved  by  the  governor  April  1,  reappro- 
priated  $62,500  for  the  Plattsburgh  Centennial. 

69 


APPROPRIATIONS     IN     LEGISLATURE.    SESSION     OF     1916 

for  additional  deputies  under  the  attorney  general,  the 
excise  bureau  was  to  receive  $67,000  not  itemized,  the 
department  of  health  S4,000,  state  industrial  commission, 
legal  bureau  S3, 200,  state  tax  department  $7,800,  edu- 
cational department  $8,400, — these  amounts  being  for 
the  legal  division  staffs. — (See  minutes  of  debate,  p.  126.) 

Senator  Wagner: 

At  the  beginning  of  his  speech  the  minority  leader  said,  "It  is 
rather  discouraging  to  discuss  a  bill  such  as  is  now  before  us 
under  these  circumstances.  In  the  first  place,  this  is  the  most 
important  bill  we  pass  this  year.  This  is  the  bill  which  appro- 
priates the  moneys  of  the  state  which  the  taxpayers  will  have  to 
pay  into  the  state  treasury  and  yet  in  the  senate  we  have  prob- 
ably ten  or  twelve  senators  listening  or  at  all  interested  in  this 
discussion.  The  public  filling  the  galleries  and  the  members 
in  the  front  row  [the  press]  seem  to  have  more  interest  in  the 
contents  of  this  legislation,  as  to  whether  it  involves  extravagance 
or  not,  than  the  senators  upon  whom  devolves  the  duty  of  care- 
fully scrutinizing  the  propositions,  the  appropriations  in  this 
bill.  Secondly,  we  are  asked  as  a  mere  perfunctory  matter  to 
discuss  this  appropriation  bill,  because,  whatever  may  be  pointed 
out,  it  has  already  been  decided  that  the  bill  is  to  be  passed  in 
its  present  form  and  there  must  be  no  amendments  made;  the 
governor  will  give  no  emergency  message;  and  therefore  it  is  on 
the  road  to  final  passage,  no  matter  what  may  be  said  against  it.  "^ 
Nevertheless,  said  the  senator,  it  was  his  duty  to  point  out  a 
few  of  the  defects  and  extravagances  of  the  bill. 

1 — Last  year  the  statement  was  made  that  appropriations 
up  to  sixty-three  millions  were  necessary  not  for  the 
administration  of  the  fiscal  year,  but  to  make  up  a  defi- 
ciency of  eleven  millions  left  by  a  careless  and  incompetent 
Democratic  administration.  This  year's  appropriations 
of  sixty  millions  are  not  eleven  million  less  than  the  ap- 
propriations last  year  and  therefore  the  statement  made 
last  year  was  not  true. 
2 — That  one  way  to  determine  whether  or  not  there  was 
extravagance  was  to  compare  the  administrative  expenses. 
For  the  last  year  of  Governor  Glynn's  administration  the 
administrative  expenses  were  $30,000,000.  Last  year  it 
was  $32,000,000  and  this  year  it  is  $37,000,000,  an  increase 

^  See  minutes  of  debate,  page  109. 

70 


CONSIDERATION     BY     THE     LEGISLATURE 


of  seven  million  dollars  in  two  years.     Senator  Wagner 
said  that  Senator  Sage  would  admit  that  the  administra- 
tive expenses  this  year  are  $35,000,000  but  the  real  amount 
was  $37,000,000  because  $2,000,000  more  which  should 
lapse  was  being  held  as  a  reserve.     The  change  of  the 
fiscal  year  from  October  to  July  was  to  be  used  as  a  pre- 
text to  hold  the  $2,000,000  in  reserve.     In  reality  the 
effect  was  to  make  such  sum  available  for  expenditure. 
Because  of  the  change  in  the  fiscal  year,  appropriations 
for  personal  service,  supplies,  etc.,  for  the  period  from 
July    1    to    September   30    should    lapse.     Said    Senator 
Wagner,  "  You  lapse  four  million  in  salaries     .     .     .     then 
there  is  four  million  left  for  temporary  service  and  the 
purchase   of   supplies   and    things   of   that    kind.     That 
ought  to  lapse,  but  what  happens?     You  don't  lapse  it, 
but  you  say  two  millions  of  that  we  will  keep  and  we  will 
appropriate  for  department  expenses  incurred  previous 
to  July  1.     It  is  a  very  happy  and  ingenious  way  of  giving 
the  department  two  millions  more  for  administration."^ 
At  the  Wednesday  morning  session  Senator  Wagner  again 
brought   up   this   matter.     Deputy   Comptroller   Reusswig   ex- 
plained that  the  $2,000,000  reserve  was  "made  up  on  the  basis 
of  the  outstanding  liabilities,  obligations  incurred,  not  yet  paid 
from  the  treasury".-    He  could  not  speak  of  past  experiences  as  to 
practice  of  keeping  such  a  reserve,  but  the  $2,000,000  reserve 
this  year  was  to  cover  expenditures  which  had  been  incurred 
and  for  which  bills  had  not  been  rendered.-'^ 

3 — That  the  increases  in  the  agricultural  department  over 
last  year  were  $362,338  with  no  additional  functions  given 
them,  and  that  $88,000  of  that  $362,000  was  for  salary 
^  increases  or  the  creation  of  new  places.  Senator  Rage 
claimed  that  the  figures  were  ridiculous.  The  agricul- 
tural schools  had  been  included.  The  increased  overhead 
expense  as  compared  with  last  year  was  $14,737.^ 

The  tax  commission  received  $189,200  in  1914.  This 
year  it  is  $257,620.  Senator  Sage  did  not  have  the  1914 
figures,  but  he  stated  that  as  compared  with  last  year 
there  was  a  decrease  of  $56,723  in  the  tax  department. 
Senator  Wagner  insisted  that  last  year  the  appropriation 
was  $253,200  and  $257,620  this  year.^ 

1  See  minutes  of  debate,  page  110.  ^  Ihid.,  page  132. 

3  Ibid.,  page  133.  ^  Ibid.,  page  112.  ^  Ibid.,  page  112. 

71 


APPROPRIATIOXS     IX     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 


There  was  an  increase  of  $946,121  over  1914  and  $402,000 
over  last  year  in  the  educational  department.  Senator 
Sage  placed  the  increase  over  1915  at  $267,419. 

In  the  prison  department  the  increase  over  1914  was 
$365,000  and  $29,000  over  1915. 

Senator  Wagner  stated  that  he  was  not  going  "to  weary 
the   Senate"   any  more  with  these  figures.      It   wasn't 
going  to   have   any   effect   anyway.      So   that    after   an 
examination  of  four  departments — agricultural,  tax  com- 
mission, educational  and   prison,  this  line  of  important 
exposition  was  abandoned. 
4 — That  the  sinking  funds  could  easily  be  decreased  by  at 
least  $5,000,000.     In  sinking  fund  No.  2  and  No.  3  no 
appropriation  either  as  a  contribution  to  amortize  the 
principal  of  the  bond  or  to  pay  the  interest  of  the  bonds 
for  which  it  was  created  was  provided  for.     Senator  Wag- 
ner claimed  that  this  was  because  of  the  excess  in  these 
funds,  and  the  Republicans  by  using  the  excess  in  these 
sinking  funds,  for  the  payment  of  interest  on  outstanding 
bonds,  were  merely  following  a  principle  which  he  believed 
to  be  sound.     Senator  Sage  denied  any  such  use  of  the 
excess.     Six  months'  interest  on  the  two  bond  issues,  Nos. 
2  and  3  was  being  appropriated.     The  interest  on  the  two 
issues  fell   due   in   March   and   September.     They  were 
appropriating    only   the    interest   through    March    1917, 
because  the  September  interest  would  be  taken  care  of  in 
the  next  appropriation  bill.^ 
5 — xhat  the  statement  to  the  press  to  the  effect  that  the 
budget  of  the  governor  had  been  increased  by  $1,500,000, 
was    incorrect.     The    actual    increase    was    $2,500,000. 
Senator   Sage  replied   that   his  statement  to  the   press 
pointed  out  that  in  addition  to  the  apparent  difference  of 
$1,500,000,  there  was  an  increase  of  $1,020,000  in  debt 
service,    making   a   total   increase    over    the    governor's 
budget  of  82,500,000.     If  the  press  got  it  wrong,  he  was 
sorry,  but  he  couldn't  be  responsible  for  the  press. 
6— That,  although  Section  178  of  the  Highway  Law  was  to 
be   repealed   providing   for  the   maintenance   of   county 
roads,  the  appropriation  bill  contained  an  item  of  $179,000 
for  this  purpose.- 

1  See  minutes  of  debate,  page  113,  for  remainder  of  discussion. 

2  Senate  Introductory  No.  596,  Pr.   No.  628.     Passed  senate   March  28 
and  assembly  April  20. 

72 


CONSIDERATION     BY     THE     LEGISLATURE 


7 — That  on  the  question  of  salaries  alone  the  appropriation 
had  been  increased  by  $300,000  over  the  bill  submitted  by 
the  governor. 

8 — That  the  answer  of  the  "majority"  to  the  increases  in 
the  bill,  which  he  had  pointed  out,  was  invariably  that 
they  were  necessary.  "The  trouble  is,"  said  Senator 
Wagner,  "if  the  majoritj^  body  here  had  permitted  the 
minority  committee  report  which  I  recommended,  we 
could  have  an  intelligent  and  scientific  criticism  of  this 
budget."  Senator  Sage  replied  that  if  they  had  that 
minority  committee,  they  would  be  "adjourning  some  time 
along  next  October."  The  minority  leader  insisted, 
however,  that  there  were  unjustifiable  increases,  particu- 
larly in  the  attorney  general's  offi.ce.  "If  I  could  have 
had  opportunity  to  have  an  examination  made,  or  a 
committee  to  determine  whether  or  not  these  increases 
were  justified  we  could  have  real  criticism  here."^ 

Senator  Sage: 

Senator  Sage  in  his  reply  to  the  criticisms  of  Senators  Bennett 

and  Wagner  confined  his  attention,  in  the  main,  to  the  remarks 

of  the  latter: 

1 — With  reference  to  the  sinking  funds  he  said,  "I  am  not 
arguing  on  the  justice  or  the  injustice  of  the  sinking  fund. 
.  .  .  I  know  the  thing  was  wrong;  I  know  an  error 
was  made;  I  know  we  have  more  money  there  than  we 
should  have,  but  that  is  entirely  beside  the  question, 
today,  because  not  being  a  constitutional  lawyer,  I  don't 
know  how  to  get  it  out."^ 
2 — That,  in  answer  to  the  criticism  that  there  were  increases 
in  the  overhead  charges,  the  $100,000  increase  in  the 
attorney  general's  office  was  because,  instead  of  employ- 
ing outside  counsel,  the  attorney  general  was  taking  care 
of  everything  in  his  own  offi.ce.  Senator  Wagner  claimed 
that  the  appropriation  was  $103,000  over  the  Carmody 
or  last  Democratic  administration.  Senators  Mills  and 
Sage  insisted  that  over  $120,000  was  paid  for  outside 
counsel  fees  in  1914.  The  debate  continued  with  Senator 
Sage  mentioning  the  following  departments  where,  in  his 
opinion,   increases  were   justified,    viz.,    industrial   com- 

1  See  Municipal  Research,  No.  70,  p.  54,  for  extensive  material  on  the 
Wagner  minority  auditing  committee. 

2  See  minutes  of  debate,  page  116. 

73 


APPROPRIATIONS    IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 

mission,  institutions,  state  college  and  normal  schools. 
For  example,  when  the  prison  department  was  reached 
the  following  "discussion"  took  place: 

Senator  Wagner  (reading  from  report) :  state  prison  increase 
$119,000. 
Senator  Sage:  Costs  more. 
Senator  Wagner:  A  large  increase. ^ 

Finally  the  department  of  agriculture  was  reached  and 
the  scrutin}^  of  reasons  for  the  increases  in  specific  depart- 
ments came  to  an  abrupt  end  in  this  fashion : 

Senator  Wagner:  .  .  .  There  is  the  department  of  agricul- 
ture (Senator  Wagner,  Senator  Brown  and  Senator  Sage  confer  and 
read  from  the  report). 

Senator  Sage:  Now  there  isn't  any  use  going  through  the  rest  of 
this  thing.  Now  I  don't  think  it  any  use  to  go  into  these  itemized 
appropriations  any  more."^ 

3 — Senator  Sage  closed  his  remarks  with  a  defense  of  a 
closely  itemized  appropriation  bill  which  does  not  contain 
a  transfer  scheme  giving  "the  governor  or  somebody  else 
the  power  to  shift  within  schedules. "  The  senator  agreed 
with  the  Cohoes  Repuhlican  that  the  giving  of  such 
power  to  the  governor  smacked  of  monarchy  and  made 
him  a  dictator.^  The  chairman  of  the  finance  com- 
mittee lost  sight  of  the  limitations,  printed  on  page  29, 
under  which  the  governor  was  authorized  to  make  trans- 
fers. Nevertheless  Senator  Sage  presented  his  side  of  the 
question  in  an  entirely  fair  manner  as  follows:  "As  far 
as  one  criticism  which  has  been  made  here  tonight,  about 
the  total  itemized  appropriations,  is  concerned,  I  think 
everyone  realizes  what  we  have  tried  to  do  this  year,  is  to 
get  as  near  as  possible  to  the  bill  prepared  by  the  governor 
or  by  the  people  working  for  the  governor.  The  senator 
from  the  18th  (Bennett)  has  said  that  he  believes  in  giving 
the  governor  or  somebody  else  the  power  to  shift  within 
schedules.  Does  he  realize  this — and  I  am  not  speaking 
of  the  governor,  any  more  than  I  am  speaking  of  anybody 
else,  governor  or  comptroller  or  chairman  of  the  finance 
committee, —  that  in  giving  that  power  he  gives  absolute 
power  over  the  entire  personnel  of  the  state  service,  and 
is  he  willing  to  give  that  power  to  anyone?  Not  to  the 
governor,  or  the  comptroller,  or  the  chairman  of  the 
finance  committee,  it  should  be  given  to  no  one."* 


^Ibid.,  page  118. 
^  Ibid.,  page  119. 
3  January  20,  1916. 

*  For  the  remainder  of  this  part  of  Senator  Sage's  speech,  see  minutes  of 
debate,  page  119. 

74 


CONSIDERATION     BY     THE     LEGISLATURE 


Senator  Brown: 

The  ''majority  leader"  devoted  the  major  portion  of  his 
remarks  to  a  justification  of  the  direct  tax  of  nineteen  and  a  half 
millions  levied  in  1915.  He  said,  "Now,  the  senator  from  the 
16th  (Wagner)  announced  that  no  state  tax  was  necessary.  That 
a  direct  state  tax  was  wholly  uncalled  for.  Well,  let  us  see  about 
that.  We  find  that  the  balance  on  June  30  will  be  $10,146,000 
[See  "pink  sheets"  page  50].  Now  if  we  had  not  put  in  the 
nineteen  and  a  half  millions  in  the  direct  state  tax,  there  would 
have  been  a  deficiency  of  nine  and  a  half  millions  on  the  30th 
day  of  June,  1916.  .  .  .  There  is  nine  and  a  half  millions  in 
the  hole,  if  we  had  not  levied  the  direct  state  tax.  Well,  then 
we  need  a  working  surplus  of  five  millions.  The  state  ought 
always  to  have  that.  There  is  fourteen  and  a  half  millions. 
Then,  if  the  state  had  not  approved  the  twenty-seven  million 
dollar  referendum  (canals)  there  would  have  been  $3,600,000 
dropped  out  there.  There  is  $18,100,000 — a  pretty  story,  isn't 
it?" 

"Senator  Wagner:  The  way  you  tell  it."^ 

After  charging  the  Democrats  with  being  "driven  almost  to 
distraction"  and  with  having  had,  since  1911,  "a  terrible  itching 
to  get  at  the  sinking  funds,"  Senator  Brown  justified  these 
appropriations  in  the  1916  bill  as  a  strict  adherence  to  the  statutes 
and  the  constitution.^ 

Senator  Wagner  closed  the  evening's  debate  by  replying  thus 
to  the  majority  leader: 

"Of  course  he  [Mr.  Brown]  is  witty  and  amusing,  but  to 
one  who  has  actual  knowledge  of  the  facts  when  he  talks  he 
tries  the  patience  tremendously.  He  uses  figures  like  a 
child  uses  a  rubber  ball  to  play  with,  just  to  suit  his  own 
purposes."^ 


1  See  minutes  of  debate,  page  120. 

2  Ibid,  page  121. 
2  Ibid.,  page  123. 


CHAPTER   VI 

APPROPRIATION    BILLS    PASSED    BY   THE    LEGISLA- 
TURE NOT  INCLUDED  IN  THE  GENERAL 
APPROPRIATION   BILL 


The  preparation,  the  procedure  and  debate  upon  the  appro- 
priation bill  have  been  set  forth  in  the  preceding  chapters.  It 
has  also  been  shown  that,  exclusive  of  the  appropriation  bill,  over 
135  separate  propositions  carrying  a  charge  upon  the  public 
treasury  were  introduced  in  the  legislature.  It  remains  to  be 
explained  how  many  of  these  miscellaneous,  special  and  local 
bills  passed  the  legislature,  in  order  to  determine  the  amount 
which  should  be  added  to  the  S52,781,13L13  carried  in  the 
appropriation  bill. 

In  the  preceding  chapter  mention  was  made  of  the  "aggregate 
budgetary  appropriations"  as  $58,652,478.31.^  This  was  the 
figure  frequently  mentioned  in  the  press  as  the  amount  of  the 
appropriation  bill  of  1916.  The  difference  between  the  §58,652,- 
478.31  and  $52,781,131.13  or  $5,871,347.18  was  the  total  appro- 
priation for  highway  maintenance  and  repair  included  in  three 
separate  bills  as  follows: 

State  and  county  highways $3,875,071 .20 

Town  and  county  highways 1,956,275.98 

Indian  Reservation  highways 40,000 .  00 

Total $5,871,347. 18 

In  the  course  of  the  debate  on  the  appropriation  bill.  Senator 
Bennett  said  that  .$2,000,000  should  be  added  to  the  $58,652,- 
478.31.  Senator  Sage  admitted  that  the  additional  amount  to 
be  appropriated  by  the  miscellaneous,  local  and  special  bills 
would  be  $1,900,000.  The  story  of  the  legislative  session  of  1916 
would  not  be  complete,  therefore,  without  an  analysis  of  the 
additional  appropriation  bills  passed  by  the  legislature.  Such  an 
analysis  shows  that  $2,498,300.06  should  be  added  to  the  $58,652,- 

1  See  "pink  sheets,"  page  50. 

76 


ADDITIONAL     APPROPRIATION    BILLS 


478.31,  making  a  grand  total  of  $61,150,778.37.  Of  this  grand 
total,  $4,138,347.60  carried  in  nine  miscellaneous  bills,  was 
approved  by  the  governor  prior  to  the  adjournment  of  the  legis- 
lature. The  remaining  $57,012,430.77  ($52,781,131.13  in  the- 
appropriation  bill  and  $4,231,299.64  in  thirty-six  miscellaneous 
bills)  were  sent  to  the  governor  as  thirty-day  bills. 

The  following  statement  is  a  summary  of  the  forty-six  appro- 
priation bills  passed  by  the  legislature  of  1916  as  they  stood  on 
May  8,  1916: 

Approved  by  governor 

Miscellaneous  special  bills  ap- 
proved prior  to  introduction 
of  appropriation  bill  (6  bills) $178,276 .40 

State  and  county  highways, 
Indian  Reservation  high- 
ways, and  barge  canal  tow- 
ing facilities  bills,  approved 
prior  to  passage  of  appro- 
priation bill  (3  bills) 3,960,071 .20 

Total  approved $4,138,347 .60 

Pending  before  governor  (30-day  bills) 

Town  aid  highway  bill,  passed 
prior  to  passage  of  appro- 
priation bill  (1  bill) $1,956,275 .98 

Miscellaneous,  local  and  spe- 
cial bills  passed  prior  to  pass- 
age of  appropriation  bill  (7 
bills) 656,881.57 

Miscellaneous,  local  and  spe- 
cial bills  passed  immediately 
following  passage  of  the  ap- 
propriation bill  (28  bills) .  .     1,618,142 .09 

Total    miscellaneous 

bills  pending $4,231,299 .64 

General  appropriation,- 
supply,  reapportion- 
ment and  construc- 
tion bill  items  (1  bill) 52,781,131 .  13 

Total    pending    before 

governor $57,012,430 .  77 

Total    passed    by 

legislature  of  1916 $61,150,778.37 

Consideration  of  Miscellaneous  Appropriation  Bills 

It  is  impossible  to  state  the  total  amount  of  consideration  given 
to  the  forty-five  miscellaneous  bills  passed  by  the  legislature. 
It  may  be  said,  in  general,  however,  that  the  county  and  "town 
aid"  highway  bills  received  considerable  attention.  When  the 
state  and  county  repair  and  maintenance  bill  was  debated  by 
the  senate,  Mr.  Wagner  stated  that  the  bill  had  been  increased 

77 


APPROPRIATIONS    IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 


over  the  governor's  estimate.^  He  believed  that  the  increase 
was  for  patronage  purposes,  i.  e.,  for  "labor  and  horse  hire." 
The  bill  passed  the  legislature  April  10,  and  went  to  the  governor 
April  12.  Inasmuch  as  the  legislature  adjourned  April  20,  the 
bill  became  a  thirty-day  bill.  The  governor  approved  it,  how- 
ever, April  15.  The  Indian  Reservations  highway  bill  was  ap- 
proved April  10. 

The  "town  aid"  highway  bill  passed  the  assembly  March  21, 
and  the  senate  April  11.  It  was  debated  for  forty  minutes  in 
the  senate  on  April  11  and  was  almost  defeated.  The  vote  was 
ayes,  27,  noes  20.-     It  went  to  the  governor  April  12. 

The  remaining  42  miscellaneous,  local  and  special  bills  received 
very  little  actual  consideration  on  the  floor  of  the  senate  or 
assembly.  The  tabulation  below  shows  that  twenty-eight  of  the 
forty-two  additional  appropriation  bills  were  passed  on  April  19 
and  20,  immediately  after  the  passage  of  the  appropriation  bill  at 
1 :00  P.  M.  April  19. 


THE 

FORTY-SIX  APPROPRIATION  BILLS  PASSED  BY  LEGISLATURE  OF   igie^ 

I.— 

II.— 

III.— 

6  Bills  approved  prior  to  April  5 

3  Bills  approved  prior  to  April  19  ...  . 

8  Thirty-day  bills  passed  prior  to  April 

19 

$178,276.40 
3,960,071.20 

2,613,157.55 

1,618,142.09 

52,781,131.13 

IV.— 

28  Thirty-day  bills  passed  April  19  and 
20 

v.— 

1  Bill — General     Appropriation     Bill 
passed  April  19.                   ... 

Total  passed  by  legislature 

Less  general  appropriation  bill  and 
the  three  highway  bills 

Total     miscellaneous,     special     and 
local  appropriations  carried  in  the 
forty-two  separate  bills  passed  by 
the  legislature  of  1916 

$61,150,778.37 
58,652,478.31 

$2,498,300  06 

1  The  amount  of  this  increase  was  $352,279.  The  increase  was  a  single, 
lump  sum  appropriation. 

-  In  the  Senate,  twenty-six  votes  are  necessary  to  pass  a  bill  except  local  or 
private  appropriation  bills  where  a  two-thirds  vote  is  required. 

3 In  the  pamphlet  published  by  the  Bureau  of  Municipal  Research  on 
May  4,  1916,  the  total  of  appropriations  passed  by  the  legislature  was  given 
as  $60,769,023.52.  Due  to  amendments  to  certain  bills,  which  were  made 
after  the  tabulation  had  been  set  up  (especially  in  the  Mohansic  bill),  the  total 
should  have  been  given  as  $61,150,778.37  as  above.  This  is  inclusive  of 
special  re-appropriation  h\\\A,  but  exclusive  of  appropriations  for  bond  accounts 
and  appropriations  between  funds,  which  do  not  affect  the  total  cost  of 
government.  As  reported  from  the  Governor's  office  and  carried  in  the  press, 
May  21st  and  22nd,  the  total  was  $61,004,456 .08.  Of  this  amount  Governor 
Whitman  vetoed  11  miscellaneous  bills  and  201  separate  items  in  the  general 
appropriation  bill,  aggregating  (according  to  the  press)  $1,901,006,  leaving  a 
total  appropriation  in  force  for  1916  of  $59,103,450.08.  The  Bureau's  com- 
pilation in  the  above  table  is  $146,322.29  in  excess  of  the  amount  carried  in 
the  newspaper  reports. 

78 


ADDITIONAL     APPROPRIATION    BILLS 


CLASSIFIED  LIST   OF  BILLS  SUPPORTING   SUMMARY  ABOVE 

I— APPROPRIATION  BILLS  APPROVED  BY  THE  GOVERNOR  PRIOR  TO  APRIL  5,  THE  DATE 
ON  WHICH  THE  APPROPRIATION   BILL  WAS  INTRODUCED 


Date 
Introd. 


Approved 
by  Gov. 


Int.  No. 


Name  of 
Proposer 


Short  Title 


Amount 


Jan. 

10.. 

Feb.    9.. 

S.     110.. 

Mar. 

6.. 

Mar.  31.. 

S.     815.. 

Mar. 

9.. 

Apr.     1.. 

S.     892.. 

Feb. 

9.. 

Mar.  16.. 

A.    626.. 

Feb. 

9.. 

Mar.    9.. 

A.    627.. 

Mar. 

2. 

Mar.  30.. 

A.  1007.. 

Horton. 
Sage  — 
Emerson 
Maier.  . 
Maier.  . 
Talmage 


Civil  Service  Investigatmg  Committee. . . , 

Legislature,  immediate  e.xpenses 

Plattsburg  Centenary  Commission 

Conservation  department,  forestry  bureau 
Conservation  law,  fire  provisions,  enforcing 
Three-mile   harbor,   Suffolk   County,  im- 
provement  


$10,000.00 
50,000  00 
62,500.001 
10,000  00 
37,000.00 

8,776.40' 


$178,276.40 


II— ADDITIONAL  APPROPRIATION  BILLS  APPROVED  BY  THE  GOVERNOR  BEFORE  THE 
APPROPRIATION  BILL  WAS  PASSED  BY  THE  LEGISLATURE 


Jan.    26. 
Feb.    25. 

Mar.     1 . 


Apr.  19.. 
Apr.  15.. 

A.    353.. 
A.    899.. 

Apr.  10. 

A.    985.. 

Arnts . 
Maier 

Maier 


Barge  canal,  towing  facilities 

Maintenance  and  repair,  state  and  county 
highways 

Highways,  Indian  reservations,  improve- 
ment  


$45,000.00 

3,875,071  20 

40,000.00 


$3,960,071.20 


III- 


-THIRTY-DAY  BILLS  (PENDING  BEFORE  GOVERNOR  FOR  SIGNATURE 
ON  ADJOLTRNMENT) 


ADDITIONAL  APPROPRIATION  BILLS  PASSED  BY  THE  LEGISLATURE  PRIOR  TO  THE  PASS- 
AGE  OF  THE  APPROPRIATION  BILL  APRIL  19 


Date 

Introd. 


Passed 
Legisla- 
ture 


Int.  No. 


Name  of 
Proposer 


Short  Title 


Amount 


Jan.  19. 

Mar.  13. 

Apr.  5 . 

Apr.  6. 

Apr.  10. 

Mar.  1 . 

Mar.  17. 

Mar.  20. 


Apr.  17.. 

S.     179.. 

Apr.  17.. 

S.     914. 

Apr.  17.. 

S.   1322   . 

Apr.  17.. 

S.   1355.. 

Apr.  17.. 

S.   1390. . 

Apr.  11.. 

A.    986.. 

Apr.  13,. 

A.  1328.. 

Apr.  15.. 

A.  1374.. 

Walton 

Slater 

Thompson^.  . 

Newton 

Walton 

Maier 

Kincaid 

Shannon. . .  . 


New  Paltz  Normal  School,  new  buildings 
Military  Law,  training,  commission  .... 

Long  Island  Agricultural  School 

Doty,  Alvah  H.,  expenses 

Lands  under  water,  survey 

Town  highways,  repair,  improvt 

National  guard,  mobilization,  etc 

Troy,  state  lands,  assessment  by  city. . . . 


$30,000  00 

100,000.00 

15,403  35 

5,947.47 

5,000  00 

1,956,275  98 

500,000  00 

530.75 


$2,613,157.55 


1  Reappropriation. 
2G.  L.  Thompson. 


79 


APPROPRIATIONS    IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 


IV- 


-THIRTY-DAY  BILLS  (PENDING  BEFORE  GOVERNOR  FOR  SIGNATURE 
ON  ADJOURNMENT) 


ADDITIONAL  APPROPRIATION  BILLS  PASSED  BY  THE  LEGISLATURE  AFTER  THE  PASSAGE 
OF  THE  APPROPRIATION  BILL,  DURING  THE  LAST  TWO  DAYS  OF  THE  SESSION 


Date 
Introd. 


Passed 
Legisla- 
ture 


Int.  No. 


Name  of 
Proposer 


Short  Title 


Amount 


Jan.  20. 

Jan.  24. 

Feb.  28. 

Mar.  6. 

Mar.  6. 

Mar.  15. 

Mar.  24. 

Apr.  6. 

Apr.  12. 

Apr.  12. 

Apr.  12. 

Apr.  12. 

Apr.  12. 

Apr.  12. 

Apr.  12. 

Apr.  1.3. 

Apr.  13. 

Apr.  14 

Apr.  15. 

Jan.  24. 

Feb.  3. 

Feb.  11. 

Feb.  21. 

Mar.  1 . 

Mar.  15. 

Mar.  17. 

Mar.  20. 

Apr.  15 . 


Apr.  20. 
Apr.  19. 
Apr.  20. 

Apr.  20. 

Apr.  20. 

Apr.  20. 
Apr.  20. 
Apr.  19. 

Apr.  20. 
Apr.  20. 

Apr.  20. 
Apr.  19. 
Apr.  20. 

Apr.  20. 

Apr.  20. 

Apr.  20. 
Apr.  20. 
Apr.  20. 
Apr.  20. 

Apr.  19. 
Apr.  19. 

Apr.  19. 
Apr.  20. 

Apr.  19. 
Apr.  19. 
Apr.  19. 

.\pr.  19. 

.-^pr.  20. 


S.  196. 
S.  230. 
S.     715. 

S.     816. 

S.     828. 

S.  980. 
S.  1197. 
S.  1351. 

S.  1407. 
S.   1409. 

S.  1422. 
S.  1424. 
S.  1425. 

S.  1427. 

S.  1428. 

S.  1433. 

S.  1440. 

S.  1455. 

S.  1461. 

.K.  307. 
A.  538. 

A.  681. 
A.  762. 

A.  968. 
A.  1250. 
A.  1340 

A.  1348. 

A.  1591. 


Jones .  . . . 
Spring.  .  . 
Halliday. 

Sage 


Cristman. 


Towner. 
Brown.  . 

Sage 


Horton.  . . 
Thompson 


Sanders . . 
Whitney. 
Walters.  . 


Walters . 
Hewitt . 


Horton.  .  . 
Whitney. 
Cristman  . 
Norton.  .  . 


Bewley. . 
Wheeler  . 

Mackey. 
Gardner  . 

Harris.  .  . 
Grant.  .  . 
Mitchell. 


Maier. 


Brereton. 


High^-ay,  Chenango  Co.,  new  route 

Dunkirk,  fish  hatchery,  establishing 

Cornell,  Veterinary  College,  special  investi- 
gation  

New  prisons  commission,  reorganization, 
construction,  new  prisons 

West  Canada  creek  bridge,  Herkimer, resur- 
facing  

Wingdale,  new  prison,  construction 

Mohansic  Hospital,  site  for,  commission. .  . 

State  enumeration,  unexpended  balance, 
reappropriation 

Butter  and  egg  investigation  of  1914 

Aersconk  Creek,  Suffolk  County,  improve- 
ment  

Antietam,  104th  Infantry,  monument 

Saratoga  Springs  reservation 

Civil  court  practice,  investigating  com- 
mittee  

Session  laws,  indexing,  investigation,  chair- 
men, judiciary  committees 

Auto  trucks,  automobiles,  fees,  schedule, 
preparing 

Civil  Service  Investigating  Committee.  .  .  . 

Mechanicville,  reimbursement  by  state.  . . . 

Motion  pictures,  board  of  censors,  salaries. 

Schenectady,  Mohawk  river  bridge,  com- 
mission   

Lockport,  18-mile  creek,  culvert 

Charities  Law,  clearing  house,  mental 
defectives,  establishing 

Delhi,  Agricultural  School 

Drake's  drawbridge,  Wappinger's  creek, 
reconstruction 

School  books,  unexpended  balances 

Port  Leyden,  Black  R.  canal  bridge 

Catherine  Creek,  Montour  Falls,  relocating 
channel 

Canal  improvements,  Erie,  Champlain  and 
Oswego 

Bell,  Alfred  D.,  contested  election 


S15,000.00 
35,000.00 

15,000.00 

400,000.00' 

2,000.00* 
200,000.00'* 
504,254. 85«* 

4,150  001* 
7,994.45 

3,500.00* 
1,500.00 
152,000.00 

10,000.00 

10,000.00 

5,000.00 
7,500.00 
402  20 
47,900.00* 

5,000.00 
12,500.00* 

10,000  00* 
25,000.00 

8,000.00* 
11,000.001 
15,000.00* 

10,000.00* 

99,240.59* 
1,200.00 


$1,618,142.09 


'  Reappropriation. 
'  .\lternate  proposals. 

*  Amount  of  miscellaneous  receipts  from  canals  which  under  Chap.  147,  Laws  1903,  must  be  appropriated 
for  this  purpose. 

'  Contingent  upon  action  of  commission.     $299,254.85  of  the  $504,254.85  was  a  reappropriation. 

*  Vetoed  by  Governor  Whitman,  Mav  20th,  1916. 


80 


ADDITIOXAL     APPROPRIATION     BILLS 


Jan. 

19. 

Jan. 

24. 

Jan. 

26. 

Jan. 

27. 

Jan. 

31. 

Feb. 

2. 

Feb. 

9. 

Brief  Outline  History  of  the  Appropriation  Bills  Passed 
BY  THE  Legislature  at  the  Session  of  1916 

In  order  to  give  the  complete  record  of  each  appropriation  bill 
cited  in  the  tables  above,  it  has  been  thought  desirable  to  present 
in  the  following  form  a  brief  history  of  all  bills  carrying  a  charge 
upon  the  treasury  which  were  passed  by  the  legislature  at  the 
session  of  1916: 

S.  Int.  No.  no— Jan.  10th.  By  Mr.  Horton.— Appropriating  $10,000  for 
stenographic  fees,  clerks'  and  assistants'  fees  and  other  e.xpenses  including 
personal  expenses  at  Albany  of  the  civil  service  committee  of  the  Senate,  except 
dm-ing  the  sessions  of  the  legislature,  in  the  investigation  of  the  civil  lists  of  the 
state  pursuant  to  resolution  of  the  Senate  adopted  April  20, 1915.  (Same  as  A.  92.) 

To  third  reading  and  Finance  Com. 

Reported.     Restored  to  third  reading. 

Passed. 

In  Assembly,  Rec.  No.  1.     To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 

Committee  discharged.  Substituted  for  A.  92  on  second  reading. 
To  third  reading. 

Passed. 

To  Governor. 

Approved.     Chapter  1. 

Printed  No.  S.  110. 

S.  Int.  No.  179— Jan.  19th.     By  Mr.  Walton.— Appropriating  $30,000  for 
the  construction  of  an  addition,  or  new  buildings,  for  the  State  normal  school 
at  New  Paltz.     (Same  as  A.  254.) 
To  Finance  Com. 
Apr.    10.     Reported  amended.     To  third  reading. 
Apr.    14.     Passed. 

Apr.    15.     In  Assembly,  Rec.  No.  392.     To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 
Apr.    17.     Reported.     To  third  reading.     Passed. 
Printed  Nos.  S.  179,  1737. 

S.  Int.  No.  196 — Jan.  20th.     By  Mr.  Jones. — Amending  section  120,  High- 
way Law,  by  establishing  a  new  highway  route  8-a  from  the  Women's  Rehef 
Corps  Home  near  Oxford,  Chenango  county,  to  the  village  of  Oxford  to  connect 
with  route  8  and  appropriating  $15,000  therefor.     (Same  as  A.  270.) 
To  Finance  Com. 
Apr.    14.     Reported.     To  third  reading. 

Apr.    17.     Passed.     In  Senate,  Rec.  No.  480.     To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 
Apr.    20.     Reported.     To  third  reading.     Passed. 
Printed  No.  S.  196. 

S.  Int.  No.  230— Jan.  24th.  By  Mr.  Spring.— Appropriating  $35,000  for  the 
estabUshment  of  a  fish  hatchery  in  the  city  of  Dunkirk,  Chautauqua  county. 
(Same  as  A.  241.) 

To  Finance  Com. 

Reported.     To  third  reading. 

Passed. 

In  Assembly,  Rec.  No.  482.     To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 

Reported.     To  third  reading.     Passed. 

To  Governor. 

Printed  No.  S.  230. 

S.  Int.  No.  715— Feb.  28th.     By  Mr.  Halhday.— Appropriating  $15,000  for 
the  New  York  State  Veterinary  College,  at  Cornell,  for  special  investigation  of 
infectious  abortion  and  sterility  in  dairy  cattle.     (Same  as  A.  967.) 
To  Finance  Com. 

Apr.    14.     Reported.     To  third  reading. 

Apr.    18.     Passed.     In  Assembly,  Rec.  No.  516.     To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 

81 


Apr. 

13. 

Apr. 

17. 

Apr. 

18. 

Apr. 

19. 

Apr. 

22. 

Mar. 

10. 

Mar. 

13. 

Mar. 

17. 

Mar. 

21. 

Mar. 

22. 

Mar. 

23. 

Mar. 

24. 

Mar. 

31. 

APPROPRIATIONS    IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 

Apr.    20.     Reported.     To  third  reading.     Passed. 
Printed  No.  S.  768. 

S.  Int.  No.  815— March  6th.     By  Mr.  Sage.— Appropriating  $.50,000  for 
various  contingent  expenses  of  the  Legislature.     (Same  as  A.  1094.) 
To  Finance  Com. 
Reported  to  Com.  of  the  Whole. 
Amended. 
To  third  reading. 
Passed. 

In  Assembly,  Rec.  120.     To  third  reading  without  reference. 
Passed. 
To  Governor. 
Approved.     Chapter  106. 
Printed  Nos.  S.  894,  1016. 

S.  Int.  No.  816 — March  6th.  By  Mr.  Sage. — Reorganizing  the  commission 
on  new  prisons.  It  is  hereafter  to  consist  of  the  Superintendent  of  State 
Prisons,  the  Superintendent  of  PubUc  Works  and  the  State  Architect  and  two 
persons  appointed  by  the  Governor.  The  commission  may  employ  a  sec- 
retary at  not  exceeding  $1,000.  It  is  to  construct  a  new  farm  and  industrial 
prison  either  at  the  Wingdale  site  or  the  Beekman  site  at  a  total  cost  not  ex- 
ceeding $1,250,000  for  buildings  and  equipment,  and  a  new  cell  block  at  Sing 
Sing  prison  and  remodel  the  present  cell  block  for  use  for  industrial  purposes. 
The  total  cost  of  the  new  cell  block  must  not  exceed  $750,000.  Prison  labor 
is  to  be  used  so  far  as  practicable.  $200,000  is  appropriated  toward  the  new 
cell  block  and  $200,000  to  begin  construction  of  the  new  farm  and  industrial 
prison.  Chapters  670,  Laws  of  1906,  and  365,  Laws  of  1910,  providing  for  a 
new  prison  to  take  the  place  of  Sing  Sing  are  repealed.  (Same  as  A.  1137.) 
To  Finance  Com. 

Mar.  17.     Amended  and  recommitted. 

Mar.  30.     Reported.     To  third  reading. 

Apr.      5.     Passed. 

Apr.      6.     In  Assembly,  Rec.  No.  274.     To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 

Apr.    20.     Reported.     To  third  reading.     Passed. 
Printed  Nos.  895,  1165. 

S.  Int.  No.  828— March  6th.  By  Mr.  Cristman. — Appropriating  $2,000 
for  surfacing  with  a  bituminous  macadam,  the  bridge  over  West  Canada  creek, 
at  Herkimer. 

To  Finance  Com. 
Apr.    13.     Reported.     To  third  reading. 
Apr.    15.    Passed.     In  Assembly,  Rec.  No.  406.     To  Ways  and  Means 

Com. 
Apr.    20.     Reported.     To  third  reading.     Passed. 

Printed  No.  S.  907. 
S.  Int.  No.  892 — March  9th.     By  Mr.  Emerson.— Reappropriating  $62,500, 
the  unexpended  balance  of  an  appropriation  made  in  1914,  for  the  purpose  of 
the  Plattsburg  Centenary  Celebration  Commission.     (Same  as  A.  1167.) 
To  Finance  Com. 
Mar.  15.     Reported.     To  third  reading. 
Mar.  21.     Passed. 

Mar.  22.     In  Assembly,  Rec.  No.  112.     To  Ways  and  Means  Com.     Com- 
mittee discharged.     Substituted  for  A.  1157  on  third  reading. 
Passed. 
Mar.  23.     To  Governor. 
Apr.      1.     Approved.     Chapter  116. 
Printed  No.  S.  987. 

S.  Int.  No.  914 — March  13th.  By  Mr.  Slater. — Adding  new  article  1-a,  to 
Military  Law,  providing  for  physical  training  of  boys  over  eight  years  of  age  in 
elementary  and  secondary  schools,  and  for  military  training  for  boys  between 
15  and  19  in  agricultural  colleges  and  secondary  schools,  and  establishing  a 
MiUtary  Training  Commission  to  consist  of  a  member  appointed  by  the  Board 
of  Regents  and  a  member  appointed  by  the  Governor,  to  hold  office  for  four 

82 


ADDITIONAL     APPROPRIATION     BILLS 


Apr. 

7. 

Apr. 

11. 

Apr. 

14. 

Apr. 

15. 

Apr. 

17. 

Apr. 

22. 

years,  together  with  the  Major  General  of  the  National  Guard,  ex-officio,  who 
is  to  be  chairman  of  the  commission.  The  commission  is  to  have  general 
supervision  over  such  physical  and  mihtary  training.  $100,000  is  appro- 
priated.    (Same  as  A.  1169.) 

To  Finance  Com. 

Amended  and  recommitted. 

Reported.     To  third  reading. 

Passed. 

In  Assembly,  Rec.  No.  358.     To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 

Reported.     To  third  reading.     Passed. 

To  Governor. 

Printed  Nos.  S.  1024,  1692. 

S.  Int.  No.  960 — March  15th.  By  Mr.  Towner. — Abohshing  the  present 
commission  on  new  prisons  and  providing  that  hereafter  it  shall  consist  of  the 
Superintendent  of  Prisons  and  four  commissioners  appointed  by  the  Governor. 
It  is  to  proceed  with  the  construction  of  the  new  prison  at  the  Wingdale  site. 
$200,000  is  appropriated.  (Same  as  A.  1287.) 
To  Finance  Com. 

Mar.  30.     Reported  amended.     To  third  reading. 

Apr.      5.     Passed. 

Apr.      6.     In  Assembly,  Rec.  No.  281.     To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 

Apr.    15.     Amended  and  recommitted. 

Apr.    20.     Reported.     To  third  reading.     Passed.     Senate  concurs. 
Printed  Nos.  S.  1079,  1532;  A.  2106. 

S.  Int.  No.  1 197 — March  27th.  By  Mr.  Brown. — Creating  a  commission  of 
three  members,  one  appointed  by  the  Governor,  one  by  the  temporary  Presi- 
dent of  the  Senate  and  one  by  the  Speaker  of  the  Assembly,  to  investigate 
what  disposition  should  be  made  of  the  sites  acquired  by  the  State  for  the 
Mohansic  State  Hospital  and  the  New  York  State  Training  School  for  Boys. 
The  commission  shall  select  a  site  for  a  new  State  hospital,  to  be  located  in  the 
southern  portion  of  the  State,  within  reasonable  distance  of  New  York  city, 
but  not  upon  any  watershed  from  which  potable  water  for  any  municipal  water 
supply  is  taken.  Construction  on  the  Mohansic  State  Hospital  and  the  Boys' 
Training  School  is  directed  to  be  stopped  until  further  action  of  the  Legisla- 
ture. $205,000  is  appropriated  for  acquiring  sites  and  $299,254.85  is  reap- 
propriated  for  construction  and  equipment  of  new  State  Hospital.  (Same  as 
A.  1512.) 

To  Finance  Com. 

Mar.  30.     Amended  and  recommitted. 

Apr.      6.     Reported  amended  to  Com.  of  the  Whole. 

Apr.    13.     To  third  reading. 

Apr.    17.     Passed.     In  Assembly,   Rec.   No.  463.     To  Ways  and  Means 
Com.     Amended  and  recommitted. 

Apr.    20.     Reported.     Restored  to  third  reading.     Passed.     Senate  concurs. 
Printed  Nos.  S.  1393,  1535,  1671;  A.  2114. 

S.  Int.  No.  1322— April  5th.  By  Mr.  G.  L.  Thompson.— Appropriating 
$15,403.35  for  maintenance  of  the  New  York  State  School  of  Agriculture  on 
Long  Island. 

To  third  reading  and  Finance  Com. 

Reported.     Restored  to  third  reading. 

Passed. 

In  Assembly,  Rec.  No.  389.     To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 

Reported.     To  third  reading.     Passed. 

To  Governor. 

Printed  No.  S.  1594. 

S.  Int.  No.  1351 — April  6th.     By  Mr.  Sage. — Reappropriating  $4,150  of  the 
unexpended  balance  of  $465,000  appropriated  by  chapter  260,  Laws  of  1915, 
for  the  expense  of  the  state  census,  for  the  purposes  of  that  act. 
To  third  reading  and  Finance  Com. 
Apr.    13.     Reported.     Restored  to  third  reading. 
Apr.    14.     Passed. 

83 


Apr. 

11. 

Apr. 

14. 

Apr. 

15. 

Apr. 

17. 

Apr. 

22. 

APPROPRIATIONS     I.\     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 

Apr.    15.     In  Assembly,  Rec.  No.  382.     To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 
Apr.    19.     Reported.     To  third  reading.     Passed. 
Apr.    22.     To  Governor. 

Printed  No.  S.  1660. 

S.  Int.  No.  1355— April  6th.     By  Mr.  Newton.— Appropriating  $.5,947.47 
for  the  payment  of  the  expenses  of  Alvah  H.  Doty  in  the  examination  of  the 
office  of  health  officer  of  the  port  of  New  York  under  Governor  Dix. 
To  thii-d  reading  and  Finance  Com. 

Apr.    11.     Reported.     Restored  to  third  reading. 

Apr.    14.     Passed. 

Apr.    15.     In  Assembly,  Rec.  No.  379.     To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 

Apr.    17.     Reported.     To  third  reading.     Passed. 

Apr.    22.     To  Governor. 

Printed  No.  S.  1664. 

S.  Int.  No.  1390— April  10th.  By  Mr.  Walton.— Appropriating  $5,000  for 
the  survey  by  the  State  Engineer  and  Surveyor  of  lands  under  water  that  are 
apphed  for. 

To  third  reading  and  Finance  Com. 

Apr.    13.     Reported.     Restored  to  third  reading. 

Apr.    14.     Passed. 

Apr.    15.     In  Assembly,  Rec.  No.  393.     To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 

Apr.    17.     Reported.     To  third  reading.     Passed. 

Apr.    22.     To  Governor. 

Printed  No.  S.  1731. 

S.  Int.  No.  1407— April  12th.     By  Mr.  Hor ton. —Appropriating  $7,994.45 
for  paying  the  claim  of  Edward  R.  O'Mally  for  services  and  disbm'sements  as 
referee  under  order  of  the  Supreme  Court  in  connection  with  the  butter  and  egg 
investigation  by  the  Attorney-General  in  1914. 
To  Finance  Com. 
Apr.    15.     Reported.     To  third  reading. 
Apr.    18.     Passed.     In  Assembly,  Rec.   No.   517.     To  Ways  and  Means 

Com. 
Apr.    20.     Reported.     To  third  reading.     Passed. 
Printed  No.  S.  1794. 

S.  Int.  No.  1409 — April  12th.  By  Mr.  G.  L.  Thompson. — Appropriating 
$3,500  for  further  improving  Aersconk  creek,  Senix  river  and  Orchard  creek, 
Suffolk  county. 

To  third  reading  and  Finance  Com. 
Apr.    15.     Reported.     Restored  to  third  reading. 

Apr.    17.     Passed.     In  Assembly,  Rec.  No.  477.     To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 
Apr.    20.     Reported.     To  third  reading.     Passed. 
Printed  No.  S.  1796. 

S.  Int.  No.  1422 — April  12th.  By  Mr.  Sanders. — Appropriating  $1,500  for 
the  construction  of  a  monument  upon  Antietam  battlefield,  to  commemorate 
the  service  of  the  One  Hundred  and  Fourth  Regiment  Infantry,  New  York 
Volunteers.     (Same  as  A.  568.) 

To  third  reading  and  Finance  Com. 
Apr.    15.     Reported.     Restored  to  third  reading. 

Apr.    18.     Passed.     In  As.sembly,  Rec.  No.  494.     To  Ways  and  Means  Cora. 
Apr.    20.     Reported.     To  third  reading.     Passed. 
Printed  No.  S.  1809. 

S.  Int.  No.  1424— April  12th.  By  Mr.  Whitney.— Appropriating  $152,000 
for  maintenance  and  improvement  of  the  Saratoga  Springs  State  Reservation. 

To  Finance  Com. 
Apr.    13.     Reported.     To  third  reading. 

Apr.    15.     Passed.     In  Assembly,  Rec.  No.  457.     To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 
Apr.     IS.     Reported  to  second  reading. 
Apr.    19.     To  third  reading.     Passed. 
Apr.    22.     To  Governor. 

Printed  No.  S.  1815. 

84 


ADDITIONAL     APPROPRIATION     BILLS 


S.  Int.  No.  1425— April  12th.  By  Mr.  Walters.— Appropriating  $10,000  for 
expenses  of  the  joint  committee  of  the  Legislature  appointed  in  1915  to  investi- 
gate and  inquire  into  the  report  of  the  Board  of  Statutory  Consolidation  on  the 
simplification  of  the  civil  practice  of  the  courts  of  the  State. 

To  Finance  Com.     Committee  discharged.     To  third  reading. 
Apr.    18.     Passed.     In  Assembly,  Rec.  No.  511.     To  Ways  and  Means 

Com. 
Apr.    20.     Reported.     To  third  reading.     Passed. 
Printed  No.  S.  1816. 

S.  Int.  No.  1427 — April  12th.  By  Mr.  Walters. — RepeaUng  chapter  673, 
Laws  of  1913,  which  authorized  the  preparation  of  an  index  of  the  session  laws 
of  the  State,  and  providing  that  the  terms  of  the  commissioners  performing  the 
work  shall  expire  May  1,  1916,  directing  the  chairmen  of  the  Senate  and  Assem- 
bly judiciary  committees  respectively  to  examine  the  plan  or  system  under 
which  the  work  has  been  conducted  and  to  report  to  the  Legislature  of  1917 
with  recommendations  as  to  practicability  of  that  or  any  other  system;  and 
appropriating  $5,000  for  expenses  and  compensation  of  the  present  commission 
to  May  1,  and  $5,000  for  expenses  of  the  chairmen  of  the  judiciary  committees 
in  complying  with  the  act.  (Same  as  A.  1581.) 
To  third  reading  and  Finance  Com. 

Apr.    15.     Reported.     Restored  to  third  reading. 

Apr.    18.     Passed.     In  Assembly,  Rec.   No.  510.     To  Ways  and  Means 
Com. 

Apr.    20.     Reported.     To  third  reading.     Passed. 
Printed  No.  S.  1818. 

S.  Int.  No.  1428— April  12th.  By  Mr.  Hewitt.— Appropriating  $5,000  for 
expenses  of  the  Commissioner  of  Highways,  Superintendent  of  Pubhc  Works 
and  the  State  Engineer  and  Surveyor  in  preparing  and  filing  a  schedule  of 
registration  fees  to  be  paid  by  auto  trucks  and  omnibuses  pursuant  to  section 
282  of  the  Highway  Law. 

To  third  reading  and  Finance  Com. 

Apr.    15.     Reported.     Restored  to  third  reading. 

Apr.    18.     Passed.     In  Assembly,  Rec.  No.  .502.     To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 

Apr.    20.     Reported.     To  third  reading.     Passed. 
Printed  No.  S.  1819. 

S.  Int.  No.  1433— April  13th.  By  Mr.  Horton.— Appropriating  $7,500  for 
the  expenses  of  the  Civil  Service  Committee  of  the  Senate  in  continuing  its  in- 
vestigation into  the  civil  service  of  the  state  pursuant  to  resolution  of  the 
Senate. 

To  third  reading  and  Finance  Com. 
Apr.    15.     Reported.     Restored  to  third  reading. 

Apr.    18.     Passed.     In  Assembly,  Rec.  No.  503.     To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 
Apr.    20.     Reported.     To  third  reading.     Passed. 
Printed  No.  S.  1850. 

S.  Int.  No.  1440— April  13th.  By  Mr.  Whitney.— Appropriating  $402.20  to 
reimburse  the  city  of  Mechanicville  for  moneys  expended  by  it  on  behalf  of  the 
State  in  connection  with  the  west  approach  of  the  Burke  Avenue  bridge,  the 
west  approach  of  the  Saratoga  Avenue  bridge  and  the  west  approach  of  the 
Hudson  river  bridge  at  River. street. 

To  third  reading  and  Finance  Com. 

Apr.    15.     Reported.     Restored  to  third  reading. 

Apr.    18.     Passed.     In  Assembly,  Rec.  No.  513.    To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 

Apr.    20.     Reported.     To  third  reading.     Passed. 
Printed  No.  S.  1857. 

S.  Int.  No.  1455 — April  14th.  By  Mr.  Cristman. — Appropriating  $47,900 
for  salaries  and  expenses  of  the  board  of  censors  of  motion  pictures  estabhshed 
under  article  48  of  the  Education  Law.  The  moneys  appropriated  for 
salaries  are  to  be  available  for  the  year  beginning  July  1,  1916,  and  the  amounts 
appropriated  for  office  and  other  expenses  are  available  immediately  upon  ap- 
pointment of  the  board  of  censors. 

85 


APPROPRIATIONS     IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 

To  third  reading  and  Finance  Com. 
Apr.    15.     Reported.     Restored  to  third  reading. 
Apr.    18.     Passed.     In  Assembly,  Rec.  No.  515.     To  Ways  and  Means 

Com. 
Apr.    20.     Reported.     To  third  reading.     Passed. 

Printed  No.  S.  1894. 

S.  Int.  No.  1461 — April  15th.  By  Mr.  Norton. — Creating  a  commission  to 
investigate  and  report  upon  the  conditions  relative  to  the  construction  of  a 
concrete  highway  bridge  with  facihties  for  double  track  trolley  hnes  over  the 
Mohawk  River  and  Barge  Canal  between  the  foot  of  State  Street  in  Schenec- 
tady to  a  point  on  Mohawk  Avenue  in  the  village  of  Scotia  about  300  feet 
westerly  from  the  junction  of  Schonowe  Avenue  and  Mohawk  Avenue.  The 
commission  is  to  consist  of  the  state  engineer  and  surveyor  and  an  engineer 
appointed  by  the  mayor  of  Schenectady,  and  in  case  they  disagree  they  are  to 
choose  a  third  engineer.  The  commission  must  report  in  writing  with  esti- 
mates and  recommendations  to  the  state  superintendent  of  pubhc  works,  the 
state  engineer  and  surveyor,  the  mayor  of  Schenectady  and  the  president  of 
Scotia  on  or  before  September  1,  1916  and  to  the  legislature  of  1917  when  it 
convenes;  $5,000  is  appropriated. 

To  third  reading  and  Finance  Com. 
Apr.    17.     Reported.     Restored  to  third  reading. 

Apr.    20.     Passed.     In  Assembly,     Rec.  No.  537.     To  Ways  and  Means 
Com.     Reported. 
To  third  reading.     Passed. 
Printed  No.  S.  1907. 

A.  Int.  No.  281 — Jan.  20th.  By  Mr.  Maier. — Appropriation  bill,  appro- 
priating $52,781,131,131. 

To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 
Reported  amended  to  second  reading. 
To  third  reading. 
Amended. 
Passed. 

In  Senate,  Rec.  No.  516.     Substituted  for  S.  1326  on  third  read- 
ing. 
Passed. 
To  Governor. 
Printed  Nos.  A.  295,  2011,  2071;  S.  1631,  181 1. 

A.  Int.  No.  307 — Jan.  24th.  By  Mr.  Bewley. — Appropriating  $12,500  for 
constructing  a  concrete  culvert  over  18-mile  creek  in  the  city  of  Lockport  from 
the  east  line  of  Pound  street  to  the  east  Une  of  lot  6,  section  14,  township  14, 
range  6. 

To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 
Feb.      9.     Amended  and  recommitted. 

Apr.    19.     Reported.     To  third  reading.     Passed.     In  Senate,   Rec.   No. 
536.     Substituted  for  S.  697  on  third  reading.     Passed. 
Printed  Nos.  A.  308,  737. 

A.  Int.  No.  353 — Jan.  26th.     By  Mr.  Arnts. — Appropriating  $45,000  for 
towing  facihties  on  completed  portions  of  the  Barge  canal  system  which  will 
be  in  use  during  the  season  of  1916.     (Same  as  S.  263.) 
To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 

Mar.  23.     Reported  to  second  reading. 

Mar.  24.     To  third  reading. 

Mar.  28.     Passed. 


Apr. 

6. 

Apr. 

10. 

Apr. 

12. 

Apr. 

17. 

Apr. 

18. 

Apr. 

19. 

Apr. 

21. 

^The  appropriations  for  highways  maintenance  and  repair  are  included  in 
other  bills  (A.  Int.  Nos.  899,  985  and  986)  and  total  .$5,871,347.18  which  makes 
the  aggregate  budgetary  appropriations,  other  than  the  remaining  42  miscel- 
laneous, special  and  local  bills,  $58,652,478.31. 

The  printed  No.  A.  295  introduced  by  Mr.  Maier  on  Jan.  20th,  was  the 
Whitman  "tentative  budget  proposal"  submitted  to  the  legislature  with  his 
annual  message  on  the  first  day  of  the  session,  Jan.  5th.  The  bill  passed  was 
printed  No.  A.  2071  or  S.  1811. 

86 


ADDITIONAL     APPROPRIATION     BILLS 


Mar. 

29. 

Apr. 

6. 

Apr. 

11. 

Apr. 

12. 

Apr. 

19. 

In  Senate,  Rec.  No.  255.     To  Finance  Com. 

Reported.     To  third  reading. 

Passed. 

To  Governor. 

Approved.     Chapter  255. 

Printed  No.  A.  354. 

A.  Int.  No.  538 — Feb.  3rd.     By  Mr.  Wheeler. — Adding  new  article  8-a  to 
State  Charities  Law,  providing  for  the  estabUshing  of  clearing  houses  for  the 
mentally  deficient,  to  examine  and  diagnose  cases  of  persons  suspected  of  being 
mentally  deficient  which  may  be  brought  to  their  notice  or  committed  to  their 
care  for  examination  and  diagnosis  and  to  make  scientific  investigations  into  the 
causes  of  mental  deficiency.     Seven  citizens  appointed  pursuant  to  section 
51  are  to  constitute  the  board  of  managers  of  State  clearing  houses  for  mental 
defectives.     $10,000  is  appropriated.     (Same  as  S.  394.) 
To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 
Apr.    10.     Reported.     To  third  reading.     Passed. 
Apr.    11.     In  Senate,  Rec.  No.  447.     To  third  reading  and  Finance  Com. 

Reported.     To  third  reading. 
A.pr.    19.     Passed. 

Printed  No.  A.  575. 

A.  Int.  No.  626— Feb.  9th.     By  Mr.  Maier.— Appropriating  $10,000  for 
expenses  of  the  forestry  bureau  in  the  Conservation  Department. 
To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 
Reported  to  second  reading. 
To  third  reading. 
Amended  in  revision. 
Passed. 

In  Senate,  Rec.  No.  95.     To  Finance  Com.     Committee  dis- 
charged.    To  third  reading.     Passed. 
To  Governor. 
Approved.     Chapter  45. 
Printed  Nos.  A.  672,  941. 

A.  Int.  No.  627— Feb.  9th.  By  Mr.  Maier.— Appropriating  $37,000  for 
enforcing  the  fire  provisions  of  the  Conservation  Law,  and  protecting  State 
land.     (Same  as  S.  493.) 

To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 

Reported  to  second  reading. 

To  third  reading. 

Passed. 

In  Senate,  Rec.  No.  76.  Substituted  for  S.  493  on  third  reading. 
Passed. 

To  Governor. 

Approved.     Chapter  35. 

Printed  No.  A.  673. 

A.  Int.  No.  681 — Feb.  11th.  By  Mr.  Mackey. — Amending  section  1, 
chapter  727,  Laws  of  1915,  which  appropriated  $25,000  for  the  State  School  of 
Agriculture  and  Domestic  Science  at  Delhi,  by  making  the  appropriation  ap- 
phcable  for  new  "buildings,"  instead  of  for  new  "building." 

To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 

Reported  amended  to  second  reading. 

To  third  reading.     Passed. 

In  Senate,  Rec.  No.  492.     To  Finance  Com. 

Reported.     To  third  reading. 

Printed  Nos.  A.  746,  2018. 

A.  Int.  No.  762— Feb.  21st.     By  Mr.  Gardner.— Appropriating  $8,000  for 
repair  or  reconstruction  of  Drake's  drawbridge  over  Wappinger's  creek  at  New 
Hamburg,  Dutchess  county.     (Same  as  S.  579.) 
To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 

87 


Feb. 

22. 

Feb. 

23. 

Feb. 

24. 

Mar. 

2. 

Mar. 

6. 

Mar. 

7. 

Mar. 

16. 

Feb. 

22. 

Feb. 

23. 

Feb. 

29. 

Mar. 

1. 

Mar. 

2. 

Mar. 

9. 

Apr. 

6. 

Apr. 

12. 

Apr. 

14. 

Apr. 

17. 

Apr. 

19. 

Mar. 

1. 

Mar. 

2. 

Mar. 

9. 

Mar. 

10. 

Mar. 

20. 

Mar. 

21. 

Mar. 

22. 

Apr. 

3. 

Apr. 

10. 

Apr. 

12. 

Apr. 

15. 

APPROPRIATIONS    IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 

Apr.    20.     Reported.     To  third  reading.     Passed.     In  Senate,  Rec.   No. 
537.     To  Finance  Com.     Committee  discharged.     To  third 
reading.     Passed. 
Printed  No.  A.  840. 

A.  Int.  No.  899 — Feb.  25th.     By  Mr.  Maier. — Making  appropriations  of 
$3,875,071.20  for  the  maintenance  and  repair  of  State  and  county  highways. 

To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 

Reported  to  second  reading. 

To  tliird  reading. 

Recommitted. 

Reported  amended.     Restored  to  third  reading. 

Passed. 

In  Senate,  Rec.  No.  182.     To  Finance  Com. 

Reported  amended  to  Com.  of  the  Whole. 

To  third  reading. 

Passed  Senate. 

To  Governor. 

Approved.     Chapter  218. 

Printed  Nos.  A.  993,  1337;  S.  1274. 
A.  Int.  No.  968— March  1st.  By  Mr.  Harris.— Appropriating  $11,000,  the 
unexpended  balance  of  appropriations  made  by  chapter  529,  Laws  of  1914, 
and  chapter  723,  Laws  of  1915,  to  meet  deficiencies  in  appropriations  for  pur- 
chase of  books  and  apparatus  for  schools  and  school  Ubraries  in  cities  and  school 
districts  for  the  school  year  ending  August  1,  1915.     (Same  as  S.  812.) 

To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 
Apr.    11.     Reported.     To  third  reading.     Passed. 

Apr.    12.     In  Senate,  Rec.  No.  456.     Substituted  for  S.  812  on  third  reading. 
Apr.    19.     Passed. 

Printed  No.  A.  1081. 

A.  Int.  No.  985— March  1st.     By  Mr.  Maier.— Appropriating  $40,000  for 
improvement  and  repair  of  highways  and  bridges  iii  Indian  Reservations  in 
comphance  with  section  159,  Highway  Law. 
To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 
Reported  to  second  reading. 
To  third  reading. 
Passed. 

In  Senate,  Rec.  No.  181.     To  Finance  Com. 
Reported  to  Com.  of  the  Whole. 
To  third  reading. 
Passed. 
To  Governor. 
Approved.     Chapter  174. 
Printed  No.  A.  1098. 
A.  Int.  No.  986— March  1st.     By  Mr.  Maier.— Appropriating  $1,956,275.98, 
for  the  State's  share  of  the  cost  of  repair  and  improvement  of  town  highways 
pursuant  to  section  101,  Highway  Law. 
To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 
Mar.     9.     Reported  to  second  reading. 
Mar.  13.     To  third  reading. 
Mar.  21.     Passed. 

Mar.  22.     In  Senate,  Rec.  No.  194.     To  Finance  Com. 
Mar.  29.     Reported  to  Com.  of  the  Whole. 
Apr.      6.     To  third  reading. 
Apr.    11.     Passed. 
Apr.    12.     To  Governor. 

Printed  No.  A.  1099. 
A.  Int.  No.  1007 — March  2nd.     By  Mr.  Talmage. — Reappi'opriating  $8,- 
776.40,  the  unexpended  balance  of  $10,000  appropriated  in  1914,  for  dredging 
and  improving  the  channel  of  Three-Mile  harbor  in  the  town  of  East  Hampton. 
(Same  as  S.  781.) 

To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 
Mar.     9.     Reported  to  second  reading. 

88 


Mar. 

9. 

Mar. 

13. 

Mar. 

20. 

Mar. 

21. 

Mar. 

22. 

Mar. 

23. 

Mar. 

28. 

Mar. 

29. 

Apr. 

10. 

ADDITIONAL     APPROPRIATION     BILLS 


Mar.  13.     To  third  reading. 
Mar.  20.     Passed. 

Mar.  21.     In  Senate,  Rec.  No.  183.     Substituted  for  S.  781  on  third  read- 
ing.    Passed. 
Mar.  22.     To  Governor. 
Mar.  30.     Approved.     Chapter  88. 
Printed  No.  A.  1122. 

A.  Int.  No.  1250— March  15th.  By  Mr.  Grant.— Appropriating  $15,000 
for  a  new  bridge  over  the  Black  River  canal  at  Main  street  in  the  village  of 
Port  Leyden.     (Same  as  S.  969.) 

To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 
Apr.    19.     Reported.     To  third  reading.     Passed.     In  Senate  Rec.  No.  540. 
To  Finance  Com.  Committee  discharged.      To  third  reading. 
Passed. 
Printed  No.  A.  1446. 

A.  Int.  No.  1328— March  17th.     By  Mr.  Kincaid.— Appropriating  $500,000 
for  mobilization,  encampment  and  field  exercise  of  the  National  Guard,  under 
direction  of  the  Governor.     (Same  as  S.  1223.) 
To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 
Mar.  30.     Reported  to  second  reading. 
Apr.     4.      Amended. 

Apr.    13.     To  third  reading.     Passed.     In    Senate    Rec.    No.    474.     Sub- 
stituted for  S.  1222.     To  third  reading.     Passed. 
Apr.    14.     To  Governor. 

Printed  Nos.  A.  1567,  1989. 

A.  Int.  No.  1340— March  17th.     By  Mr.  Mitchell— Appropriating  $10,000 
for  relocating  the  channels  of  Catherine  Creek  and  Falls  Creek  in  the  village  of 
Montour  Falls,  so  that  they  will  form  a  confluence  and  flow  into  the  Barge 
canal  at  Ayres  street.     (Same  as  S.  1026.) 
To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 

Apr.    12.     Amended  and  recommitted. 

Apr.    15.     Amended  and  recommitted. 

Apr.    19.     Reported.     To  third  reading.     Passed. 

Apr.    20.     In  Senate  Rec.  No.  542.     To  third  reading  without  reference. 

Printed  Nos.  A.  1579,  2076,  2108. 
A.  Int.  No.  1348— March  20th.     By  Mr.  Maier.— Appropriating  $99,240.59, 
for  the  improvement  of  the  Erie,  Champlain  and  Oswego  canals,  being  the 
miscellaneous  receipts  to  September  30,  1915,  on  account  of  such  improvement, 
under  chapter  147,  Laws  of  1903,  as  amended. 
To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 
Apr.    19.     Reported.     To  third  reading.     Passed.     In  Senate,  Rec.   No. 
528.     To   third  reading,  and  Finance  Com.  Committee  dis- 
charged.    To  third  reading.     Passed. 
Printed  No.  A.  1600. 
A.  Int.  No.   1374— March  20th.     By  Mr.  Shannon.— Appropriating  $530.75 
to  pay  an  assessment  levied  by  Troy,  February  20,  1914,  against  the  State 
upon  lands  in  such  city.     (Same  as  S.  1153.) 
To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 
Apr.    14.     Reported.     To  third  reading.     Passed. 

Apr.    15.     In  Senate,  Rec.  No.  503.     To  Finance  Com.     Committee  dis- 
charged.    To  third  reading.     Passed. 
Apr.    17.     To  Governor. 

Printed  No.  A.  1633. 
A.  Int.  No.  1591— April  15th.     By  Mr.  Brereton.— Appropriating  $1,200  to 
reimburse  Alfred  D.  Bell  for  personal  expenses  and  counsel  fees  incurred  by 
him  in  the  contest  for  his  seat  as  member  of  Assembly  by  Silas  B.  Axtell. 
To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 
Apr.    20.     Reported.     To  third  reading.     Passed.     In  Senate,  Rec.  No. 
541.     To  third  reading  without  reference.     Passed. 
Printed  No.  A.  2105. 

89 


appropriations   in   legislature,  session   of   1916 

Bills  that  Passed  Only  One  House 
The  following  tabulation  traces  the  history  of  fourteen  bills 
which  passed  the  senate,  but  were  held  up  by  the  leaders  of  the 
assembly;  and  also  the  history  of  eight  bills  which  passed  the 
assembly,  but  were  not  acted  upon  favorably  by  the  senate. 
Judging  from  past  practice,  these  bills  will,  in  all  probability, 
receive  favorable  action  next  year.  In  the  words  of  the  Hon. 
Alfred  E.  Smith,  speaking  in  the  constitutional  convention  of 
1915,  "Some  of  these  bills  have  been  introduced  so  often  that 
you  do  not  have  to  introduce  them  any  more;  you  can  leave  them 
up  in  the  back  of  the  chamber  and  they  will  find  their  way  into  the 
bill-box  themselves."  Mr.  Wadsworth  asked  Mr.  Smith  if  all  of  a 
long  list  of  such  local  and  special  bills  passed  in  1914.  Mr.  Smith 
replied,  "  All  of  them,  all  except  the  Lyons  Falls  bridge.  That  has 
only  been  introduced  three  times;  that  is  not  old  enough  yet.  That 
is  one  that  has  not  reached  the  proper  age;  it  has  not  ripened."^ 

Passed  Senate  Onlt. 
S.  Int.  No.  10 — Jan.  5th.     By  Mr.  Cristman. — Appropriating  $4,000  for  a 
concrete  retaining  wall  on  the  east  side  of  the  canal  feeder  at  Ilion. 
To  Finance  Com. 
Jan.    31.     Amended  and  recommitted. 
Apr.    13.     Reported.     To  third  reading. 
Apr.    15.     Passed.     In  Assembly,  Rec.  No.  407.     To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 

Printed  Nos.  S.  10,  362. 
S.  Int.  No.  192 — Jan.  19th.     By  Mr.  Marshall. — Appropriating  $1,500  for 
improving  State  property  known  as  "Arsenal  Green"  in  the  village  of  Malone, 
under  the  direction  of  Adirondack  Chapter  539,  Daughters  of  American  Revo- 
lution.    (Same  as  A.  244.) 

To  Finance  Com. 
Apr.    14.     Reported.     To  third  reading. 
Apr.    15.     Passed.     In  Assembly,  No.  428.     To    Ways  and  Means  Com. 

Printed  No.  S.  192. 
S.  Int.  No.  311— Jan.  28th.     By  Mr.  Wicks.— Appropriating  $2,.500  for 
building  a  retaining  wall  on  the  Erie  canal  at  South  George  and  West  Whites- 
boro  streets,  in  the  city  of  Rome.     (Same  as  A.  447.) 
To  Finance  Com. 
Apr.    15.     Reported.     To  third  reading. 
Apr.    18.     Passed.     In  Assembly,  Rec.  No.  526.     To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 

Printed  No.  S.  315. 
S.  Int.  No.  761— Feb.  29th.  By  Mr.  G.  F.  Thompson. — Creating  a  com- 
mission of  five  members  to  be  appointed  one  by  the  Governor,  two  by  the  tem- 
porary President  of  the  Senate,  and  two  by  the  Speaker  of  Assembly,  to  confer 
with  Governors  and  Legislatures  of  adjoining  States  with  a  view  of  securing 
enactment  in  such  States  of  reciprocal  legislation  for  examination  of  witnesses 
whose  testimony  is  required  by  a  legislative  committee  or  conmiission.  $500 
is  appropriated  for  expenses. 

To  third  reading  and  Finance  Com. 

Reported.     Restored  to  third  reading. 

Amended. 

Passed. 

In  Assembly,  Rec.  No.  207.     To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 

Printed  Nos.  S.  819,  1283. 

'  Minutes  N.  Y.  Constitution  Convention  1915,  Record  69,  page  1609. 

90 


Mar. 

15. 

Mar. 

21. 

Mar. 

30. 

Mar. 

31. 

ADDITIONAL     APPROPRIATION    BILLS 


S.  Int.  No,  8i2 — March  6th.  By  Mr.  Argestinger. — Appropriating  $11,000, 
the  unexpended  blance  of  appropriations  made  by  chapter  529,  Laws  of  1914, 
and  chapter  725,  Laws  of  1915,  to  meet  deficiencies  in  appropriations  for  pur- 
chase of  books  and  apparatus  for  schools  and  school  hbraries  in  cities  and  school 
districts  for  the  school  year  ending  August  1,  1915.  (Same  as  A.  968.) 
To  Finance  Com. 

Apr.    11.     Reported.     To  third  reading. 

Apr.    12.     A.  968  substituted. 

Apr.    18.     Passed.     In  Assembly,  Rec.  No.  488.     To  Judiciary  Com. 
Printed  No.  S.  891, 

S,  Int,  No,  1050— March  20th.  By  Mr.  HalUday.— Appropriating  $4,000 
for  repairs  to  the  dike  on  Mill  creek,  at  Watkins,  in  Schuyler  county.  (Same 
as  A.  1367.) 

To  Finance  Com. 
Apr.    13.     Reported  to  Com.  of  the  Whole. 

Apr.    19.     To  third  reading.     Passed.     In  Assembly,  Rec.  No.  561.     To 
Ways  and  Means  Com. 
Printed  No.  S.  1191. 

S,  Int,  No.  1051 — March  20th.  By  Mr.  Horton. — Adding  a  new  article, 
9-a,  to  the  Executive  Law,  creating  a  department  of  State  police  to  be  in  charge 
of  a  superintendent  appointed  by  the  Governor  for  a  five-year  term  at  an  an- 
nual salary  of  $5,000.  The  State  pohce  is  to  consist  of  two  troops,  each  com- 
posed of  a  captain,  one  lieutenant,  one  first  sergeant,  four  sergeants,  four  cor- 
porals, one  saddler  and  one  blacksmith  and  forty-five  privates.  Appointment 
to  the  force  is  to  be  for  two-year  terms.  The  superintendent  may  establish 
local  headquarters  in  localities  deemed  most  suitable  and  with  the  consent  of 
the  Governor  may  acquire  property  for  that  purpose.  $250,000  is  appro- 
priated.    (Same  as  A.  1357.) 

To  Finance  Com. 

Amended  and  recommitted. 

Amended  and  recommitted. 

Amended  and  recommitted. 

Reported  to  Com.  of  the  Whole. 

To  third  reading. 

Passed.     In  Assembly,  Rec.  No.  468.     To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 

Reported.     To  third  reading.     Lost. 

Printed  Nos.  S.  1192,  1558,  1560,  1626. 

S,  Int,  No.  1 182 — March  24th.     By  Mr.  Walters. — Providing  for  a  conven- 
tion to  revise  the  rules  of  civil  practice  in  the  courts  of  the  State.     The  con- 
vention is  to  be  composed  of  the  Board  of  Statutory  Consolidation,  the  Joint 
Committee  of  the  Legislature  heretofore  appointed  to  examine  the  report  of 
such  board,  and  justices  of  the  Appellate  Division  as  follows:  Two  each  from 
the  first  and  second  departments  and  one  each  from  the  other  departments 
chosen  by  the  justices  of  the  Appellate  Division  in  their  respective  depart- 
ments.    $25,000  is  appropriated. 
To  Finance  Com. 
Apr.    20.     Reported  by   Rules   Committee.     To  third  reading.     Passed. 
In  Assembly,  Rec.  No.  570.     To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 
Printed  No.  S.  1354. 

S,  Int,  No,  1222— March  27th.  By  Mr.  Halliday. — Appropriating  $20,000 
for  improving  the  Newton  Battlefield  Monument  Park  at  Elmira. 

To  Finance  Com. 
Apr.    13.     Amended  and  recommitted. 
Apr.    15.     Amended  and  recommitted. 
Apr.    17.     Reported  to  third  reading. 
Apr.    19.     Passed.     In  Assembly,  Rec.  No.  529.   To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 

Printed  Nos.  S.  1417,  1865,  1899. 

S.  Int,  No,  1263— March  29th.  By  Mr.  Mills.— Creating  a  Health  Insur- 
ance Commission  to  investigate  sickness  and  accidents  among  employees  of 
the  State  not  covered  by  the  Workmen's  Compensation  Law,  and  the  present 

7  91 


Apr. 

1. 

Apr. 

3. 

Apr. 

5. 

Apr. 

11. 

Apr. 

13. 

Apr. 

17. 

Apr. 

20. 

APPROPRIATIONS    IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 

methods  of  caring  for  injured  and  sick  by  mutual  or  stock  insurance  companies 
or  otherwise,  and  health  insurance  legislation  of  other  countries,  with  a  view 
to  recommending  remedial  legislation  on  the  subject.  The  commission  is  to 
consist  of  two  Senators  appointed  by  the  temporary  president  of  the  Senate, 
two  Assemblymen  appointed  by  the  Speaker  and  not  exceeding  five  persons 
not  members  of  the  Legislature  appointed  by  the  chairman  of  the  commission. 
The  commission  is  to  elect  its  own  chairman.  $25,000  is  appropriated. 
To  Finance  Com. 

Apr.    10.     Reported.     To  third  reading. 

Apr.    17.     Passed.     In  Assembly,  Rec.  No.  471.     To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 
Printed  No.  S.  1462. 

S.  Int.  No.  13 1 1 — -April  1st.  By  Mr.  Brown. — Creating  a  commission  of 
three  members,  one  appointed  by  the  Governor,  one  by  the  Temporary  Presi- 
dent of  the  Senate  and  one  by  the  Speaker  of  the  Assembly,  to  investigate  con- 
ditions and  laws  in  the  State  relative  to  rural  credits  and  cooperation.  The 
commission  is  to  report  to  the  Governor  and  Legislature  by  the  first  of  the 
next  legislative  session  with  suggestions  and  recommendations  as  to  needed 
laws  to  improve  rural  credits,  banking  and  financial  facilities  and  to  induce  the 
cooperative  organization  of  the  farmers  of  the  State.  $2,500  is  appropriated 
for  expenses. 

To  third  reading  and  Finance  Com. 

Apr.    13.     Reported.     Restored  to  third  reading. 

Apr.    14.     Passed. 

Apr.    15.     In  Assembly,  Rec.  No.  359.     To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 
Printed  No.  S.  1567. 

S.  Int.  No.  1436— April  13th.  By  Mr.  Mills.— Appropriating  $20,000  for 
expenses  of  the  joint  legislative  committee  on  taxation  appointed  pursuant  to 
resolution  of  the  Senate  April  24,  1915,  and  continued  by  joint  resolution  of  the 
Legislature  in  1916. 

To  third  reading  and  Finance  Com. 
Apr.    15.     Reported.     Restored  to  third  reading. 

Apr.    18.     Passed.     In  Assembly,  Rec.  No.  504.     To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 
Printed  No.  S.  1853. 

S.  Int.  No.  1441— April  13th.     By  Mr.  Walters.— Appropriating  $10,199.42 
for  the  State  College  of  Forestry  at  Syracuse  University. 
To  Finance  Com. 
Apr.    15.     Reported  amended  to  Com.  of  the  Whole. 
Apr.    17.     To  third  reading. 

Apr.    19.     Passed.     In  Assembly,  Rec.  No.  543.     To  Ways  and  Means 
Com. 
Printed  Nos.  S.  1858,  1902. 

S.  Int.  No.  1460— April  15th.  By  Mr.  Sage.— Appropriating  $30,000  forthe 
department  of  agriculture  for  carrying  out  the  provisions  of  Article  11-A, 
Agriculture  Law,  establishing  in  the  department  of  agriculture  a  bureau  of 
farm  settlement. 

To  third  reading  and    Finance  Com.     Committee  discharged. 
Restored  to  third  reading. 
Apr.    20.     Passed.     In  Assembly,  Rec.  No.  538.     To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 
Printed  No.  S.  1906. 

Bills  Passed  in  Assembly  Only. 

A.  Int.  No.  207 — Jan.  18th.  By  Mr.  Maier. — Appropriating  $1,555,  the 
amount  collected  by  the  State  Comptroller  from  racing  associations,  pursuant 
to  section  285,  Membership  Corporations  Law,  for  the  expenses  of  the  State 
Racing  Commission  for  1915. 

To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 
Jan.    26.     Reported  to  second  reading. 
Jan.    27.     To  third  reading. 
Feb.      1.     Passed. 

Feb.      2.     In  Senate.  Rec.  No.  7.     To  Finance  Com. 
Printed  No.  A.  207. 

92 


ADDITIONAL     APPROPRIATION     BILLS 


A.  Int.  No.  279 — Jan.  20th.  By  Mr.  A.  Taylor. — Amending  chapter  160, 
Laws  of  1912,  which  provided  for  the  erection  of  a  boat  house,  shelters,  wharves 
and  retaining  walls  at  Buffalo  for  the  Third  Division,  Third  Battalion,  Naval 
Militia,  generally.  It  reappropriates  $39,905.06  unexpended  balance  of  former 
appropriations  for  that  purpose  and  makes  an  additional  appropriation  of 
$25,000.     (Same  as  S.  203.) 

To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 

Apr.    19.     Reported.     To  third  reading.     Passed.     In  Senate,   Rec.   No. 

533.  To  Finance  Com. 
Printed  No.  A.  279. 

A.  Int.  No.  305— Jan.  24th.     By  Mr.  G.  T.  Davis.— Appropriating  $11,000 
for  the  construction  of  a  new  steel  bridge  over  Black  river  canal  at  East 
Whitesboro  street  in  the  city  of  Rome.     (Same  as  S.  407.) 
To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 

Apr.    19.     Reported.     To  third  reading.     Passed.     In  Senate,   Rec.  No, 

534.  To  Finance  Com. 
Printed  No.  A.  306. 

A.  Int.  No.  306— Jan.  24th.     By  Mr.  G.  T.  Davis.— Appropriating  $15,000 
for  the  construction  of  a  new  steel  bridge  over  the  Black  river  canal  at  Stanwix 
street  in  the  city  of  Rome  to  replace  the  present  structure.     (Same  as  S.  406.) 
To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 

Apr.    19.     Reported.     To  third  reading.     Passed.     In  Senate,   Rec.   No. 

535.  To  Finance  Com. 
Printed  No.  A.  307. 

A.  Int.  No.  317— Jan.  24th.     By  Mr.  Oldfiekl.— Appropriating  $100,000  for 
improving  the  channel  of  the  Chemung  river  and  removing  obstruction  there- 
from near  the  city  of  Corning.      (Same  as  S.  268.) 
To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 
Apr.    20.     Reported.     To  third  reading.     Passed.     In  Senate,  Rec.  No. 
.543.     To  Finance  Com. 
Printed  No.  A.  318. 

A.  Int.   No.  319— Jan.  24th.     By  Mr.  Bush.— Appropriating  $11,000  in 
addition  to  former  appropriations  for  repairing  and  reconstructing  the  dikes 
of  the  Chemung  river  within  the  city  of  Elmira.     (Same  as  S.  250.) 
To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 
Mar.     9.     Reported  amended  and  recommitted. 

Apr.    19.     Reported.     To  third  reading.      Passed.     In  Senate,  Rec.  No. 
5.39.     To  Finance  Com. 
Printed  Nos.  A.  320,  1315. 

A.  Int.  No.  1023 — March  3rd.  By  Mr.  Welsh. — ^Extending  to  February  15, 
1917,  the  time  for  the  commissioners  designated  to  consolidate,  codify  and 
revise  the  laws  relating  to  decedent's  estates  and  surrogate's  court  practice, 
to  make  final  report,  and  reappropriating  $1,768.98,  the  unexpended  balance 
of  $4,500  appropriated  in  1914,  for  the  commission.  (Same  as  S.  792.) 
To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 

Mar.  23.     Reported  to  second  reading. 

Mar.  24.     To  third  reading. 

Mar.  28.     Passed. 

Mar.  29.     In  Senate,  Rec.  No.  269.     To  Finance  Com. 
Printed  No.  A.  1145. 

A.  Int.  No.  1304 — March  16th.  By  Mr.  A.  Taylor. — Reappropriating 
$5,000  appropriated  by  chapter  500,  Laws  of  1914,  as  amended,  for  a  memorial 
to  Jesse  Ketchum,  on  the  grounds,  or  in  the  buildings,  of  the  Buffalo  State 
Normal  School.     (Same  as  S.  988.) 

To  Ways  and  Means  Com. 
Apr.      7.     Reported.     To  third  reading.     Passed. 
Apr.    10.     In  Senate,  Rec.  No.  408.     To  Finance  Com. 
Printed  No.  A.  1527. 


93 


CHAPTER   VII 
CONCLUSIONS 


The  preceding  chapters  have  been  devoted  to  a  simple  descrip- 
tion of  the  actual  procedure  of  the  legislature  of  the  state  of  New 
York  on  appropriation  bills  during  the  session  of  1916.  The 
purpose  in  the  preparation  of  these  chapters  was  to  draw  as 
accurately  as  possible  a  picture  of  the  legislature  acting  upon 
bills  carrying  a  charge  upon  the  public  treasury.  Little  attempt 
has  been  made  to  criticize  or  evaluate  the  practices  described. 
While  some  errors  in  detail  may  have  been  made,  the  greatest 
possible  care  has  been  taken  to  present  the  facts  and  figures 
correctly. 

It  seems  fitting  now  to  formulate  from  this  study  of  the  legisla- 
tive session  those  general  conclusions  which  seem  to  be  important 
for  the  student  of  American  legislative  methods  pertaining  to  the 
appropriation  of  public  money.  These  may  be  stated  in  short 
form  as  follows: 

1 — The  finance  and  the  ways  and  means  committees  pre- 
sented a  joint  appropriation  bill  to  the  legislature,  thus 
securing  initial  consideration  of  an  identical  bill  in  both 
houses.  This  did  away  with  the  customary  differences 
of  opinion  between  the  two  houses — the  hurried  conference 
committee  meetings  for  the  purpose  of  reaching  a  com- 
promise, and  the  consequent  rushing  through  at  the  last 
moment  of  a  bill  which  suited  neither  house  but  was  the 
result  of  a  hasty  adjustment  of  conflicting  interests. 
Thus,  the  two  committees  arranged  their  differences  in 
advance  and  acted  apparently  on  the  assumption  that  no 
amendments  by  private  members  were  to  be  tolerated, 
and  that  the  respective  houses  would  accept  as  a  matter 
of  course  the  bill  presented  to  them. 

2 — Although  the  appropriation  bill  was  reported  to  the 
legislature  by  the  finance  and  the  ways  and  means  com- 

94 


CONCLUSIONS 


mittees,  in  its  amended  form,  earlier  than  customary  and 
was  considered  by  both  houses  for  a  longer  period  of  time 
than  usual,  it  is  not  apparent  that  any  advantage  was 
derived  in  the  way  of  searching  debate  and  alterations  in 
appropriations  on  the  basis  of  new  information  brought 
out  by  the  legislative  discussion. 

3 — The  appropriation  bill  was  not  passed  under  an  emer- 
gency message  from  the  governor  as  in  former  years,  and, 
therefore,  was  not  amended  at  the  very  last  minute  and 
passed  with  haste  and  in  such  form  that  only  the  leaders 
could  know  what  the  bill  really  contained. 

4 — The  appropriation  bill  was  not  passed  on  the  last  day  of 
the  session  in  accordance  with  general  custom,  but  received 
the  approval  of  the  assembly  three  days,  and  the  senate 
one  day,  before  adjournment.  Thus  was  avoided  the  un- 
seemly practice  of  rushing  through  the  general  appropria- 
tion bill,  under  an  emergency  message,  during  the  closing 
hours  of  the  session,  but  it  should  be  remembered  that 
after  the  passage  of  this  general  measure  twenty-eight  local 
and  special  bills,  involving  a  charge  on  the  treasury  of 
$1,618,142.09,  were  passed.  It  is  not  apparent  just  what 
gains  for  efficiency  and  economy  were  made  in  passing  the 
bill  a  few  hours  earlier  than  in  previous  years. 

5 — The  governor's  recommendation  with  respect  to  an 
itemized  appropriation  bill  was  adopted  by  the  legislature. 
Generally  speaking,  the  personal  service,  maintenance, 
construction  and  other  large  divisions  of  state  appropria- 
tions were  itemized  in  great  detail.  This  is  the  first  time 
in  the  history  of  the  state  in  which  the  principle  of  segrega- 
tion in  the  appropriation  bill  has  been  carried  to  such  a 
great  extent.  However,  in  thus  making  hard  and  fast 
detailed  appropriations  the  legislature  refused  to  accept 
Mr.  Whitman's  plan  for  the  transfer  of  appropriations 
subject  to  certain  limitations  and  the  approval  of  the 
governor.  By  this  rigid  classification  of  items,  the  legis- 
lature has  destroyed  all  elasticity  in  administration  and 
has  closely  hampered  department  heads  by  making  bind- 
ing upon  them  the  most  minute  rules  of  action  for  the 
entire  period  covered  by  the  bill. 

95 


APPROPRIATIONS    IN    LEGISLATURE,     SESSION     OF     1916 

6 — The  governor  recommended  one  appropriation  bill;  the 
legislature  passed  forty-six.  This  number,  however,  was 
smaller  than  in  former  years.  In  1915,  the  governor 
approved  sixty-four  separate  bills  carrying  a  charge  on 
the  treasury. 

7 — The  Sage  budget  procedural  bill  approved  by  the  governor 
on  April  5  promises  still  further  to  reduce  the  number  of 
appropriations  by  providing  that  all  appropriations  must 
be  included  "in  a  single  bill."  It  remains  to  be  seen 
whether  the  forty-six  bills  of  1916  will  be  reduced  to  one 
bill  in  1917,  for  the  Sage  law  may  not  prevent  separate 
bills  being  passed  under  certificates  of  necessity  from  the 
governor.  The  actual  legal  effect  of  the  Sage  bill  is 
highly  conjectural. 

8 — Practice  this  year  shows  that  the  provision  to  the  effect 
that  all  appropriations  must  be  "in  one  bill"  may  prove 
to  be  of  little  effect  if  the  legislature  is  permitted  to  bring 
many  bills  under  one  cover,  bind  them  together  and  call 
one  bill  "Part  I,"  another  "Part  II,"  another  "Part  III," 
and  so  on.  Unless  all  the  appropriations  for  each  institu- 
tion or  division  of  the  government  are  gathered  at  one 
place  in  the  bill,  it  will  be  possible  to  slip  local  and  special 
appropriations  into  the  measures  at  such  places  and  in 
such  form  as  to  avoid  that  public  scrutiny  which  is  par- 
ticularly desirable  for  this  type  of  appropriation.  This 
makes  it  imperative  for  those  who  speak  of  appropriations 
"all  in  one  bill"  to  define  the  form  in  which  they  are  to 
appear  "all  in  one  bill." 


9 — In  view  of  the  fact  that  the  appropriation  bill  was  intro- 
duced in  both  houses  of  the  legislature  at  least  two  weeks 
before  adjournment  and  that  the  debate  in  the  assembly 
was  only  two  and  one  half  hours,  and  in  the  senate  only 
four  hours  and  fifty-four  minutes,  it  seems  reasonable 
to  conclude  that  the  Sage  procedural  law,  which  requires 
the  introduction  of  the  appropriation  bill  on  March  15, 
will  not  automatically  guarantee  adequate  scrutiny  and 
debate.  This  seems  all  the  more  probable  when  we 
remember  that  under  the  Sage  law  the  finance  and  the 
ways  and  means  committees  are  equipped  with  special 

96 


CONCLUSIONS 


machinery  in  the  way  of  staff  agencies  for  collecting  data 
that  will  give  them  a  command  over  financial  information 
which  no  other  member  of  the  legislature  can  hope  to 
secure.  From  this  we  may  conclude  that  if  publicity  and 
scrutiny  are  desired,  it  is  imperative  to  require  by  manda- 
tory rule  not  only  the  early  introduction  of  the  bill,  but 
day  by  day  consideration  of  the  bill,  department  by 
department,  in  committee  of  the  whole  with  separate  vote 
on  each  main  section.  In  order  that  this  debate  may  be 
more  than  merely  perfunctory,  it  is  equally  necessary  that 
provision  should  be  made  for  the  governor  and  heads  of 
departments  to  be  present  on  the  floor  to  answer  questions 
and  explain  the  requests  and  needs  of  spending  officers. 

10 — With  reference  to  the  debate  in  the  senate,  the  following 
points  are  to  be  noted,  as  borne  out  by  the  facts  pre- 
sented above  (Chapter  V)  and  the  stenographic  record 
published  in  full  in  the  appendix: 

a — Only  one  senator,  Mr.  Bennett,  talked  with  some 
fullness  of  knowledge  directly  to  the  points  in  ques- 
tion, but  his  elaborate  arguments  were  wholly  with- 
out result 

b — The  minority,  as  Senator  Wagner  confessed,  was  not 
in  possession  of  enough  detailed  information  to  attack 
items  successfully,  and  was  therefore  thrown  back 
upon  the  mere  tactics  of  discrediting  bills  in  general 
by  showing  increases  over  previous  years — a  pro- 
cedure as  unavailing  as  Senator  Bennett's  argument 

c — Little  or  no  attention  was  paid  to  the  debate  by  the 
senators,  for  a  majority  of  them  were  absent  and 
nearly  all  of  those  who  were  present  were  concerned 
with  other  matters  rather  than  with  the  discussion 
in  hand — probablj^  not  over  six  of  the  fifty-one  sen- 
ators were  aware  of  the  nature  of  the  discussion  going 
on 

d — The  feeling  seems  to  have  prevailed  in  the  senate 
from  the  opening  of  the  debate  that  the  discussion 
would  not  avail  anything,  for  the  party  leaders  had 
already  decided  that  the  bill  was  to  be  put  through 
in  the  form  in  which  it  was  introduced 

e — No  elaborate  explanation  or  defence  of  the  appro- 
priation bill  was  made  in  either  house  by  the  com- 
mittee chairman  in  charge  of  the  bill,  apparently  on 
the  assumption  that  the  bill  was  to  be  passed  as 
introduced  and  explanation  was  unnecessary 

97 


APPROPRIATIONS     IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 


f — The  allotment  of  any  time  at  all  for  debate  on  the 
bill  seems  to  have  been  a  matter  of  form  for  the  pur- 
pose of  allowing  the  minority  members  to  express  any 
opinions  which  they  entertained,  because  the  time  of 
the  majority  was  largely  consumed  in  the  senate  by 
a  member  who  expressed  a  number  of  critical  objec- 
tions 

g — The  sponsors  of  the  bill  expected  to  receive  no 
enlightenment  from  the  discussion.  This  is  evident 
when  it  is  borne  in  mind  that  it  was  decided  in  ad- 
vance to  permit  no  amendments 

h — The  discussion  on  the  general  appropriation  bill, 
carrying  a  charge  of  more  than  fifty  million  dollars 
upon  the  treasury,  awakened  no  interest  in  the  legis- 
lature or  among  the  citizens  at  large. 


98 


APPENDIX 

Debate  in  the  Senate  of  the 
State   of  New  York 
ON  the 
Annual  Appropriation  Bill 

April  18  and  19,  1916 
The  Minutes  of  the  Official  Stenographer  Printed  in  Full, 


APPROPRIATIONS     IN    LEGISLATURE,     SESSION     OF     1916 


IN  THE  SENATE 

Albany,  N.  Y.,  Tuesday,  April  18,  1916. 

After  Recess  at  3:31  P.  M. 

Senator  Brown — Mr.  President,  I  ask  unanimous  consent  to  take  up  the 
Appropriation  Bill.     And  I  will  call  for  a  slow  rollcall. 

President  Schoeneck — Third  reading  of  the  bill. 

The  Clerk — Third  reading  No.  1001  Appropriation  Bill  for  the  support  of 
Government. 

The  President — Last  section. 

Senator  Wagner — Not  yet,  Mr.  President. 

Senator  Bennett — Mr.  President,  in  opposing  this  bill  I  do  not  want  to  be 
understood  as  criticising  the  work  of  those  who  have  had  the  work  of  making 
it  up.  We  all  realize  that  it  is  a  tremendous  job  and  that  some  one  man  on 
the  committee  has  got  to  bear  the  burden  of  the  work  and  I  am  perfectly  sat- 
isfied that  in  the  Senator  from  the  28th  we  have  had  the  best  man  to  under- 
take that  work  and  the  work  has  been  done  and  has  been  done  on  time.  I 
would  also  like  to  have  it  understood  that  in  anything  I  have  to  say  about 
the  bill  I  am  simply  taking  it  for  granted  we  all  have  the  welfare  of  the  State 
at  heart  and  that  all  that  any  of  us  want  to  do  is  to  see  that  the  people  of  the 
State  get  full  returns  for  the  money  they  pay  into  the  treasury  in  the  shape  of 
taxes. 

What  I  say  is  not  intended  as  criticism  of  anybody  but  is  simply  put  forth 
as  an  indication  of  the  way  in  which  I  think  some  improvements  might  be  made 
and  I  expect  to  discuss  the  bill  only  generally.  The  first  thing  that  strikes  us 
about  this  bill  is  part  one  of  the  bill,  that  is  the  Appropriation  Bill,  plus  part 
two  which  is  the  old  Supply  Bill.  We  all  know  the  Supply  Bill,  to  supply 
deficiencies  in  Government,  and  part  two  of  this  bill  is  what  originally  was  the 
old  Supply  Bill  and  is  the  Supply  Bill  covering  deficiencies,  as  I  understand  it, 
for  only  nine  months. 

Senator  Brown — Mr.  President,  under  the  rules  the  time  is  limited  to  two 
hours  on  a  side  and  we  would  like  to  know  how  we  are  to  apportion  the  time  of 
the  Senator. 

Senator  Bennett — Mr.  President,  my  understanding  from  what  the  Senator 
from  the  28th  said  was  that  we  were  to  discuss  it  today  and  tomorrow.  I  did 
not  understand  you  were  going  to  pass  it  now. 

Senator  Brown — No,  we  are  not  going  to  pass  it  yet;  it  is  not  discussion  on 
final  passage.  When  the  minority  is  ready  they  can  discuss  it.  I  am  not  doing 
this  to  interfere  with  the  Senator  from  the  18th,  but  unless  we  have  some  plan 
we  are  apt  to  run  into  an  indefinite  talk. 

Senator  Bennett — I  am  not  going  to  talk  very  long. 

Senator  Brown — I  want  you  to  have  the  opportunity. 

Senator  Bennett — I  understand  then  that  what  I  have  to  say  is  not  part  of 
the  time  under  the  rule? 

President  Schoeneck — The  Chair  desires  to  call  attention  of  the  Senate  to 
the  fact  that  the  special  rule  is  not  in  force  until  the  motion  is  made  to  close 
debate,  according  to  the  interpretation  laid  upon  the  special  rule  by  the  Chair, — 
(interruption)  the  Chair  was  calling  the  Senator's  attention  to  the  fact  that  un- 
der his  interpretation  of  the  rule  that  limitation  of  time  for  discussion  of  the 
bill  does  not  take  effect  until  the  motion  to  close  debate  has  been  carried. 

Senator  Wagner — Then  there  are  two  hours  after  that? 

President  Schoeneck — According  to  the  Chair's  interpretation  of  that  there 
are  two  hours  to  be  apportioned  to  the  majority  and  two  hours  apportioned  to 
the  minority. 

Senator  Argetsinger — That  does  not  take  effect  until  some  one  has  moved 
to  close  debate? 

President  Schoeneck — Yes,  and  that  motion  carries. 

Senator  Walters — Mr.  President,  I  desire  to  submit  to  the  Chair  a  different 
interpretation. 

(Here  followed  considerable  discussion  with  reference  to  the  special  rules.) 

Senator  Bciuiett — Now,  Mr.  President,  the  Senator  from  the  28th  stated 
j^esterday  that  he  would  like  to  have  this  bill  advanced  to  third  reading  with 

100 


MINUTES     OF     THE     SENATE     DEBATE 


the  understanding  that  it  be  debated  today  and  tomorrow.  Now  that  rule 
only  applies  on  final  passage. 

(Some  more  discussion  with  reference  to  the  rule.) 

President  Schoeneck — The  Senator  will  proceed. 

Senator  Bennett — The  scheme  under  which  this  Legislature  started  this 
year  showed  that  the  question  of  the  proper  expenditure  of  the  money  of  the 
State  has  become  a  very  live  issue.  The  Governor  adopted  the  very  praise- 
worthy plan  of  submitting  to  the  Legislature  a  budget,  having  first  called  the 
heads  of  departments  together.  The  Legislative  Committees  have  gone 
over  that  budget  and  have  submitted  a  bill  somewhat  diiTerent  but  on 
the  whole  following  out  its  plan  not  only  as  to  method  of  appropriation  but  as 
to  the  amount.  I  find  increases  here  and  there.  Of  course  it  is  impossible  to 
tell  from  simply  reading  in  the  bill  itself  whether  these  changes  from  the  Gov- 
ernor's plans  are  justifiable  or  not.  That  is  a  matter  that  the  Governor 
will  have  to  take  up.  But  there  are  three  general  statements  that  can  be  ap- 
plied to  the  situation  with  regard  to  our  appropriation  and  revenue. 

I  read  to  you  several  times  quotations  from  the  message  of  the  original 
Governor  Dix.  The  sense  of  it  was  that  before  a  Legislative  Body  should  be 
called  upon  to  act  upon  an  Appropriation  Bill,  it  should  at  the  same  time  have 
before  it  an  estimate  of  the  revenues,  the  estimated  revenues.  The  Finance 
Committees  have  followed  out  that  suggestion  and  their  estimate  of  the  revenues 
shows  the  wisdom  of  following  such  a  course,  because  it  enables  us  to  see  at  a 
glance  whether  our  appropriations  are  going  to  result  in  a  deficit  or  a  surplus. 

The  first  thing  I  would  call  your  attention  to  is  that  the  Appropriation  Bill 
itself,  if  we  passed  nothing  more,  would  result  in  our  appropriating  $13,446,000 
more  than  the  revenues  for  this  year.  I  don't  lose  sight  of  the  fact  that  we 
will  start  the  fiscal  year  with  a  surplus  of  ten  millions,  but  that  is  not  revenue 
of  the  coming  year.  That  ten  million  is  the  result  of  the  fact  that  last  year 
in  the  last  act  signed  by  the  Governor  we  imposed  a  direct  tax  for  the  purposes 
of  Government,  of  ten  million  dollars  so  this  surplus  is  just  the  amount  of  that 
direct  tax.  Of  course  it  is  a  good  thing  to  have  that  surplus,  but  nevertheless, 
the  Appropriation  Bill  says  that  the  total  appropriations  of  this  bill  are  .$58,632,- 
000  while  the  revenues  are  only  $45,000,000  or  an  excess  of  appropriations 
over  revenues  of  $13,446,000  to  be  exact. 

Senator  Sage — Will  the  Senator  give  way  for  a  moment?  I  don't  wish  to 
have  a  wrong  impression.  There  are  three  measures  pending  which  wil\  in- 
crease that  revenue. 

Senator  Bennett — In  addition  I  will  call  attention  to  the  fact  that  in  totalling 
up  the  amount  of  the  appropriations,  Part  VI  has  not  been  totalled.  Of 
course  that  is  explainable  to  a  great  extent  that  a  large  amount  are  re-ap- 
propriations of  the  amounts  coming  out  of  the  Canal  and  Highway  Fund,  not 
out  of  the  general  fund,  but  the  special  fund  provided  for  these  special  im- 
provements. But  there  are  several  hundred  thousand  dollars  included  in  the 
re-appropriations  which  are  for  general  purposes  of  Government,  and  of  course 
a  re-appropriation  is  an  appropriation  just  as  much  as  anything  else.  If  we 
have  a  fund  to  get  at,  those  funds  will  be  spent  just  as  much  as  the  new  ap- 
propriations, so  if  you  total  up,  we  are  actually  spending  $14,000,000  more  than 
the  revenue. 

Now,  on  top  of  that  we  have  already  passed  certain  separate  bills  carrying 
appropriations  and  we  voted  last  night  here  in  favor  of  the  State  Constabulary 
which  I  understand  carries  an  appropriation  of  $250,000  and  w^e  have  voted  for 
one  or  two  measures  looking  toward  repairs  one  of  which  the  papers  state  car- 
ries half  a  million  appropriation,  so  before  we  get  through  we  will  have  passed 
separate  bills  not  mentioned  in  this  summary  which  will  add  between  two  and 
three  million  to  the — 

Senator  Sage — How  much?  Mr.  President,  the  total  of  those  appropria- 
tions, and  this  is  the  total  passed  out  by  the  Finance  Committee,  amounts  to 
$1,900,000  and  of  that  amount  we  have  included  everything.  For  instance 
there  are  two  prison  bills,  one  for  three  hundred  thousand  and  one  for  four 
hundred  thou.sand.     Only  one  of  those  two  bills  can  be  signed. 

Senator  Bennett — Well,  we  will  say  two  million;  but  that  increases  the 
deficit  by  just  two  million  and  when  you  once  get  a  deficit  every  million  added 
makes  it  look  bigger. 

101 


APPROPRIATIONS     IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 

Now,  on  top  of  that  we  are  committed  to  the  proposal  that  the  State  shall 
pay  the  regulative  expenses  of  the  Pubhc  Service  Commission  of  the  First 
District — my  recollection  is  that  we  have  passed  a  bill  for  that. 

Senator  Sage — But-,  Mr.  President,  the  Assembly  has  amended  that  bill 
to  take  effect  July  1917. 

Senator  Bennett — Well,  if  you  prefer,  that  will  be  eliminated.  I  thought 
that  perhaps  the  Senator  from  the  35th  would — (interruption)  but  in  any  event 
it  is  a  part  of  the  Mayor's  program  and  part  of  the  plan  of  the  Tax  Reduction 
Committee  and  the  Brown  Committee,  and  if  that  is  passed  then  we  are  in 
honor  bound  to  provide  for  the  regulative  expenses  of  the  Public  Service  Com- 
mission of  the  First  District,  estimated  at  least  six  hundred  thousand  dollars. 

Now,  of  course,  I  have  been  of  opinion  that  those  bills  which  relieve  Nev/ 
York  City  from  burdens  would  not  pass  and  I  have  stated  several  times  that 
in  my  opinion  the  bills  would  be  the  bills  that  imposed  a  burden  on  New  York 
City.  But  I  am  assuming  that  these  bills  would  pass  and  I  believe  that  the 
Senator  from  the  35th  is  going  to  do  all  he  can  to  pass  that.  Being  a  member 
of  this  body  I  have  got  to  move  on  the  assumption  that  what  the  Senator  from 
the  35th  is  trying  to  pass  he  is  going  to  pass.  It  is  therefore  proposed  to  re- 
lieve the  City,  and  to  place  upon  the  State  the  burden  of  certain  Normal 
schools  of  New  York  City — 

Senator  Brown — Mr.  President,  a  request  has  come  from  the  Republicans 
of  the  Assembly  that  the  Republicans  of  the  Senate  meet  them  in  joint  con- 
ference.    I  therefore  move  that  we  take  a  recess  until  5 :30  P.  M. 

The  President — The  question  is  upon  the  motion  of  the  Senator  from  the 
35th. 

The  motion  is  carried  and  the  Senate  stands  adjourned  until  5 :30  P.  M. 

(Subsequently  a  second  adjournment  was  taken  until  8  o'clock.) 


102 


MINUTES     OF     THE     SENATE     DEBATE 


AFTER   THE   RECESS 

The  Clerk — Third  reading  No.  1001,  by  Mr.  Maier,  making  appropriation 
for  the  support  of  government. 

Senator  Bennett — Mr.  President,  the  RepubHcan  members  have  been  so 
enlightened  by  the  caucus  which  we  have  just  had  by  the  Senator  from  the 
17th  as  to  the  correct  methods  of  taxation,  that  I  don't  know  if  there  is  much 
occasion  for  me  to  continue  the  first  part  of  my  argument,  though  interrupted, 
I  had  just  arrived  at  the  point  afterwards  carried  out  by  someone  else  at  the 
caucus.     When  the  recess  was  moved — 

Senator  Wagner — We  are  all  anxious  to  know  what  took  place  at  the  caucus, 
if  you  will  let  us — 

Senator  Bennett — When  the  recess  was  moved  I  was  just  about  to  state 
that  I  had  called  attention  to  the  fact  that  the  appropriation  bill  itself  appro- 
priates $13,400,000  in  excess  of  revenue  and  that  the  outside  bills  carried  addi- 
tional appropriations  of  some  two  millions  and  that  that  ambitious  plan  on 
which  the  Legislature  had  embarked  for  the  relief  of  New  York  City  required 
several  million  dollars  to  be  taken  out  of  the  Treasury  of  the  State  and  paid 
into  the  City  Treasury  and  also  that  several  millions  be  taken  off  the  City  and 
put  over  onto  the  State.  To  add  those  to  the  appropriation  bill,  you  have  the 
result  that  there  is  a  possibility  that  the  appropriation  will  exceed  the  revenue 
somewhere  between  twenty  and  twentj^-five  millions,  as  against  which  we 
have  only  this  surplus  of  ten  millions  and  certain  measures,  at  the  foot  of  the 
next  sheet,  in  which  it  is  stated  (inaudible)  but  there  is  no  mistaking  the  fact 
that  at  the  end  of  the  year  the  Treasury,  at  the  end  of  the  next  fiscal  year  the 
Treasury  will  be  as  bare  as  we  were  told  the  Treasury  was  at  the  end  of  the 
last  fiscal  year. 

Now  it  is  a  question  of  either  cutting  down  our  expenses  or  imposing  a  direct 
tax.  We  will  have  to  pass  at  the  end  of  the  next  fiscal  year  a  much  larger 
direct  tax  than  the  one  which  we  passed  last  year.  It  may  be  that  the  predic- 
tion made  by  the  Senator  from  the  35th  on  April  19th  will  be  realized  quicker 
than  he  expected.  I  hold  in  my  hand  a  clipping  from  the  Tribune  of  April 
19th,  in  which  it  is  stated  that  the  Senator  from  the  35th  predicts  that  inside 
of  five  years  the  State  of  New  York  will  be  imposing  regularly  a  direct  tax  of 
between  twenty  and  thirty  million  dollars.  If  these  appropriations  go  through 
and  the  plan  which  we  have  adopted  for  New  York  City  is  put  through,  we  will 
meet  that  condition  at  the  end  of  the  next  year  unless  we  cut  down  our  expenses. 

Now  either  it  is  not  intended  to  give  New  York  City  this  relief — but  I  will 
not  use  that  word  intended,  for  there  is  no  possibility  of  giving  New  York  this 
relief — or  else  there  has  got  to  be  some  method  devised  for  raising  revenue 
other  than  that  proposed  in  the  prefix  to  this  appropriation  bill.  It  is  my 
opinion  that  we  have  got  to  come  to  it  and  the  quicker  we  realize  the  situation 
the  better.  It  is  a  good  deal  better  to  divide  up  the  direct  tax  this  year  and 
impose  a  part  of  it  this  year  than  it  is  to  impose  the  whole  in  a  year  from  now, 
if  we  have  got  the  income  of  the  direct  tax.  We  should  face  the  situation,  in 
my  opinion,  and  I  believe  the  situation  might  be  met  by  pruning  the  appro- 
priations. 

As  I  say,  the  bill  will  come  up  before  the  Governor  and  he  has  the  power  to 
employ  investigators,  and  will  be  in  a  position  to  treat  the  individual  items, 
while  it  is  impossible  that  any  one  member  of  this  body,  with  no  power  to 
require  testimony,  to  pass  upon  the  question  of  whether  the  increases  in  this 
bill  over  the  Governor's  budget  are  justified  or  not. 

Now,  so  much  for  that  part. 

There  is  this  further  thought  that  I  would  like  to  bring  up  at  this  time.  It 
is  one  that  I  stated  before.  This  bill  not  only  adopts  but  carries  out  into  more 
cast-iron  form,  the  Governor's  idea  of  a  segregated  budget.  But  it  has  omitted 
that  part  of  the  Governor's  plan  which  makes  the  segregated  budget  workable, 
namely,  the  provisioii.  which  gave  the  Governor  power  to  transfer  from  one 
item  to  another.  It  is  a  well  known  fact  that  the  attempt  to  introduce  such 
a  budget  to  the  State  in  the  last  of  Glynn's  Administration,  which  plan  did 
not  have  the  power  of  transfer,  brought  about  a  very  disastrous  condition  in 
one  of  the  departments,  with  tlie  result  that  it  was  remedied  by  getting  the 
Comptroller  to  turn  his  back,  while  an  indirect  method  was  adopted  for  trans- 

103 


APPROPRIATIONS    IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 

ferring  the  money  to  the  place  where  it  was  needed.  If  we  are  going  to  adopt 
a  segregated  budget  we  should  give  the  Comptroller  or  the  Governor  or  some- 
body the  power  to  make  the  transfer.  If  the  Budget  Committee  appointed 
by  the  bill  which  is  about  to  pass  is  competent  to  make  up  the  budget,  it  is 
competent  to  make  the  transfer,  and  if  we  cannot  bring  ourselves  to  giving 
this  power  to  the  Governor  or  to  the  Comptroller  or  someone  else,  give  it  to 
the  Budget  Committee.  In  my  opinion,  that  would  not  be  the  best  solution. 
My  opinion  would  be  to  give  it  to  the  Governor,  to  centralize  the  power  of 
government  in  the  Executive;  but  it  ought  to  be  lodged  in  someone,  otherwise 
we  will  have  an  unworkable  budget. 

Now  there  is  another  thing  which  I  would  like  to  call  to  the  attention  of 
this  bodv  and  that  is  that  the  appropriation  bill — what  used  to  be  the  appro- 
priation bill,  alone,  being  part  one  of  this  bill,  is  three  per  cent  larger  than  last 
year's  appropriation,  plus  part  two  of  the  bill,  known  as  the  Supply  bill.  It 
covers  nine  months,  and  calls  for  $1 ,900,000.  If  it  ran  the  whole  twelve  months 
I  take  it  it  would  figure  larger;  but  the  general  appropriation  liill,  part  one  of 
this  bill,  is  three  per  cent  larger  than  last  year's  appropriation  bill,  plus  part 
two  of  this  bill,  which  is  the  supply  bill.  In  other  words,  the  appropriations 
this  year  are  eight  to  ten  per  cent  larger  than  last  year. 

Senator  Sage — You  said  the  appropriations  are  eight  to  ten  per  cent  larger? 

Senator  Bennett — Figuring  it  on  that  basis:  Part  one  is  three  per  cent, 
plus  the  supply  bill,  and  the  supply  bill  being  part  two,  is  six  per  cent,  and  this 
supply  bill  covers  only  nine  months.     Six  plus  three  is  nine  per  cent. 

Senator  Sage — Which  supply  bills  are  you  taking  into  consideration? 

Senator  Bennett — When  I  refer  to  the  supply  bill,  I  am  referring  to  part 
two. 

Senator  Sage — But  you  are  comparing  it  with  an  appropriation  of  last  j'ear 
and  this  year  you  have  got  to  realize  that  the  supply  bill  items  are  from  the 
year  before. 

Senator  Bennett — That  is  what  I  stated.  The  general  appropriation  bill 
last  year  was  about  thirty-two  millions.  The  appropriation  bill,  this  year, 
part  one,  is  thirty-five  millions.  In  other  words,  your  appropriation  bill,  part 
one,  of  the  bill  this  year,  is  larger  than  last  year's  general  appropriation  bill, 
plus  part  two.  I  have  the  exact  figures.  That  would  indicate  to  me  that  last 
year  you  remember  we  consolidated  a  number  of  departments  and  made  a 
reduction  in  expenses.     But  instead  this  year  there  has  been  an  increase. 

Now  there  is  nothing  in  this  bill  to  prevent  any  official  from  exceeding  his 
appropriation.  In  a  way,  that  has  happened.  In  New  York  City  we  have 
a  provision  making  it  a  crime  for  a  public  official  to  exceed  his  appropriation. 

Senator  Brown — Will  the  Senator  permit  an  interruption?  Does  he  mean 
the  bill  that  I  introduced  upon  that  subject  covering  all  cases  of  the  kind  where 
a  State  official  exceeds  his  appropriation?  The  most  drastic  bill  ever  intro- 
duced in  the  Legislature  to  cover  these  cases. 

Senator  Bennett — Has  that  bill  been  passed? 

Senator  Brown — Yes,  sir. 

Senator  Bennett — As  I  remember,  it  provides  that  where  the  head  of  a 
department  must  file  a  report  on  the  31st  day  of  January,  and  that  if  he  does 
not  do  it,  the  Comptroller  cannot  give  him  anj-  more  money. 

Senator  Brown — For  that  department. 

Senator  Bennett — That  is  not  drastic.  If  the  Comptroller  files  his  report 
he  can  get  his  money. 

Senator  Brown — It  requires  a  special  report  showing  wherein  he  has  ex- 
ceeded his  appropriation  and  the  reasons  therefor,  if  any.  There  is  also  a 
statute  making  it  a  misdemeanor  to  exceed. 

Senator  Sage — It  was  passed  last  year.     The  Hinman  bill  of  last  year. 

Senator  Brown — There  is  an  old  provision  in  the  Finance  Law,  making  it  a 
misdemeanor,  and  we  have  provided  now  that  if  any  man  exceeds  his  appro- 
priation he  cannot  get  any  money  for  his  department  unless  he  has  filed  a 
special  report  showing  wherein  he  exceeded  it.  Now,  it  was  expected,  it  waa 
conceived  that  publicity  of  that  character  would  be  the  greatest  deterrent 
against  public  officials  exceeding  an  appropriation,  and  I  still  beUeve  it  is  the 
most  effective  one. 

Senator  Bennett — I  was  going  to  suggest  that  in  addition  to  that  we  require 

104 


MINUTES     OF     THE     SENATE     DEBATE 


that  the  public  official,  the  head  of  a  department,  shall  spend  only  one-twelfth 
of  the  appropriation  every  month  and  there  you  put  the  hurdles  closer. 

Senator  Sage — Mr.  President,  that  would  be  perfectly  impossible  and 
unfair.  The  expenses  vary  greatly  from  month  to  month.  The  Secretary  of 
State's  office,  for  instance,  in  issuing  licenses  to  automobiles.  During  the 
time  when  this  is  being  done  the  office  is  very  busy.  In  the  Summer,  when  he 
is  not  issuing  them,  there  is  not  that  condition.  You  cannot  provide  for  this 
thing.  That  was  one  trouble  with  the  Governor's  budget  where  he  provided 
for  one-twelfth  of  the  year.  The  expenses  each  month  are  entirely  different. 
You  cannot  possibly  do  it  that  way. 

Senator  Bennett — Possibly  that  suggestion  is  unworkable.  But  I  still 
maintain  that  the  first  suggestions  that  I  made  are  suggestions  which  this  body 
ought  to  take  into  consideration.  We  are  going  to  appropriate  from  twenty 
to  twenty-five  millions  more  than  the  revenue.  You  cannot  contradict  these 
figures,  if  we  live  up  to  the  program  outlined,  and  if  you  do  not  give  any  relief 
to  New  York  City  we  are  going  to  appropriate  at  least  fifteen  millions  in  excess, 
and  that  means  a  direct  tax  this  year  or  a  tremendously  accentuated  tax  next 
year. 

Senator  Sage:  Does  the  Senator  wish  me  to  contradict  those  figures,  those 
you  spoke  about,  the  re-appropriation? 

Senator  Bennett — I  did  not  speak  of  that. 

Senator  Sage — You  did,  before  we  started  this  session. 

Now  I  want  the  Senator  to  understand  that  I  agree  with  him  in  certain 
particulars  but  figuring  that  the  bills  which  are  expected  to  be  passed — and 
there  is  every  reason  to  suppose  that  they  will  be  passed — you  have  $10,146,000 
as  a  surplus;  that  added  to  your  indirect  revenue,  makes  $55,352,000.  Total 
of  your  budget  appropriation,  including  everything,  will  possibly  be  about 
$60,000,000.  Now,  with  the  other  pending  measures,  you  figure  $6,800,000, 
which  added  to  the  $55,352,000,  makes  something  over  $60,000,000  to  meet 
$60,000,000  appropriation,  and  I  don't  see  how  you  can  figure  from  that  that 
there  is  going  to  be  a  deficit. 

Senator  Bennett — Of  course,  if  you  assume  that  these  revenue  measures  are 
going  to  pass — 

Senator  Sage — I  do. 

Senator  Bennett — And  that  the  New  York  City  measures  do  not  pass,  you 
will  have  an  entirely  different  situation,  but  I  have  as  much  right  to  assume 
that  one  part  of  your  program  will  pass  as  you  have  the  other.  I  have  as 
much  right  to  assume  the  one  as  the  other.  Now  the  program  for  the  relief 
of  New  York  City  is  just  as  definite  and  just  as  much  of  a  pledge,  and  in  the 
opinion  of  the  Senator  from  the  35th,  just  as  much  of  a  necessity  as  the  passage 
of  a  l)ill  for  additional  revenue.  Now  of  course  if  you  are  not  going  to  pass 
bills  for  the  relief  of  New  York  City,  let  us  admit  it,  and  I  will  alter  my  figures. 

Senator  Sage — Whether  the  program  of  the  Senator  from  the  35th  is  the 
program  of  New  York  which  you  speak  of  — 

Senator  Bennett — I  am  talking  about  the  program  of — well,  the  Mayor's 
program  is  a  little  more  ambitious  and  includes  many  things  not  in  Senator 
Brown's  program.  The  large  things  will  be  necessary  if  the  program  is  carried 
out. 

Senator  Sage — We  could  not  possibly  put  in  the  figures  for  the  Pubhc 
Service  Commission  for  the  First  District  because  we  could  not  get  any  figures. 

Senator  Bennett — You  can  appropriate  as  much  as  is  necessary  for  the 
expenses. 

Senator  Sage — We  don't  care  to  do  it  that  way. 

Senator  Bennett— If  you  put  that  money  into  their  hands  they  will  use  it. 

The  bill  provides  that  the  bills  are  to  be  paid  by  audit  of  the  State  Comp- 
troller, which  applies  to  the  City  Comptroller.  If  New  York  City  spends  its 
own  money,  then  it  is  up  to  the  City  to  get  reimbursed  from  the  State  and  I 
think  we  are  perfectly  safe  in  looking  to  the  Comptroller  and  if  he  decides 
there  are  not  any  for  regulative  expenses  the  City  will  have  to  stand  the  loss; 
but  it  is  easy  enough  for  us  to  appropriate  enough  to  cover  whatever  bills  the 
State  Comptroller  shall  determine  are  part  of  the  regulative  expenses. 

Senator  Sage — The  Senator  is  innocent,  and  he  realizes  that  the  bills  that 
are  sent  up  for  the  Comptroller  to  audit  will  have  to  be  paid  if  those  balances 

105 


APPROPRIATIONS     IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 


exist.  Now  they  can  make  as  many  bills  as  they  want  within  $600,000  and 
the  Comptroller  will  have  to  audit  those  bills.  That  is  the  thing  we  do,  we 
put  it  into  their  hands. 

Senator  Brown — Will  the  Senator  from  the  18th  give  way? 

Senator  Bennett — No,  not  yet;  until  I  have  answered  the  Senator  from  the 
28th. 

If  they  do  send  in  this  estimate  that  is  asked  for  and  they  send  that  in  and 
we  appropriate  a  lump  sum — 

Senator  Sage — We  intended  to  cut  down  but  they  have  not  sent  it  up  to  us 
at  all,  and  the  Assembly,  owing  to  that  fact,  have  amended  the  bill  to  take 
effect  July  1,  1917. 

Senator  Brown — Now  will  the  Senator  give  way? 

Senator  Bennett — Yes. 

Senator  Brown — Now,  Mr.  President,  there  has  been  a  tremendous  effort 
from  all  sources,  the  Executive  Chamber  and  both  Houses  of  the  Legislature 
to  itemize  appropriations,  and  Senator  Bennett  asks  that  a  lump  sum  be  ma,de 
to  pay  the  regulative  expenses  of  the  Public  Service  Commission  of  the  City 
of  New  York,  before  the  State  has  had  any  opportunity  to  observe  and  regulate 
the  items  of  that  charge. 

Senator  Wagner — Will  the  Senator  from  the  35th  yield? 

Senator  Brown — Yes. 

Senator  Bennett — Of  course,  I  still  have  the  floor  when  all  this  "yielding" 

is  over. 

Senator  Wagner — Only  the  other  day  you  appropriated  another  $150,000 
to  the  Conservation  Department  for  the  administration  of  the  reservation  at 
Saratoga  and  you  said  that  you  had  to  give  a  lump  sum  because  there  was  not 
time  to  itemize  the  amounts  and  that  the  Executive  as  well  as  the  leader  of 
the  House  was  in  favor  of  the  lump  sum  appropriation. 

Senator  Brown — Now,  Mr.  President,  that  is  one  thing;  but  that  is  a  de- 
partment in  which  the  State  has  perfect  confidence.     (Laughter.) 

Senator  Wagner — If  the  Senator  will  state  that  he  has  no  confidence  in  the 
Public  Service  Commission? 

Senator  Brown — No;  I  won't  say  that. 

Senator  Wagner — You  imply  that. 

Senator  Brown — But  when  the  State  undertakes  to  pay  the  salaries  of  the 
Public  Service  Commission  of  the  City  of  New  York  it  has  to  bear  in  mind  the 
appropriations  for  the  Committee  up-State  and  establish  such  differences  in 
enumeration  as  differences  in  location  will  permit— and  now  I  am  coming  to 
the  point— oh  (to  Senator  Wagner)  we  have  a  right  to  pass  upon  the  salary 
in  the  Public  Service  Commission  for  regulative  duties  of  the  City  of  New 
York  and  it  is  the  duty  of  the  financial  committees  of  the  House  to  do  so.  In 
January  I  requested  from  my  committee  of  that  Commission  on  at  least  three 
occasions  the  items,  from  the  Public  Service  Commission,  and  I  directed  the 
Comptroller  of  this  State,  acting  as  Chairman  of  that  committee,  I  directed 
the  Comptroller  to  get  them,  and  he  could  not  get  them  because  they  would 
not  give  him  the  assistance.  Letters  were  written  repeatedly,  and  I  have  at 
last  within  three  davs  received  letters  from  the  President  of  that  Commission 
saying  that  it  is  immaterial,  the  City  won't  lose  anything,  because  it  can  put 
in  its  claim  afterwards. 

Senator  Wagner— That  is  your  President,  not  mine. 

Senator  Brown — No,  the  President  of  the  Public  Service  Commission  of  the 
City  of  New  York  and  I  told  the  Mayor  half  a  dozen  times  in  the  last  three 
months  that  that  information  should  be  furnished,  and  nobody  is  to  blame  for 
it  excepting  the  people  of  the  City  of  New  York. 

Senator  Wagner — You  pointed  at  me  when  you  said  the  President  of  this 
Commission.     I  am  not  responsible  for  his  appointment,  you  are. 

Senator  Brown— Well,  I  think  that  is  a  matter  of  doubt  (laughter)  but  I 
don't  care  to  debate  it.  I  agree  with  part  of  the  statement  of  the  gentleman 
from  the  16th,  namely,  that  part  when  he  says  he  is  not  responsible. 

Senator  Wagner — As  long  as  you  absolve  me,  I  am  satisfied. 

Senator  Brown — Now,  nobody  is  to  blame  about  this  Public  Service  Com- 
mission excepting  the  people  of  the  City  of  New  York  for  not  furnishing  us  a 
schedule  of  expenses. 

106 


MINUTES     OF     THE     SENATE    DEBATE 


Senator  Wagner — Not  the  people  of  the  City  of  New  York. 

Senator  Brown — Well,  why  didn't  they  see  that  we  received  it?  Didn't 
they  have  influence  enough? 

Senator  Wagner — That  is  a  State  Department  as  well  as  the  Conservation 
or  any  other  department. 

Senator  Brown — Well,  we  have  had  a  hard  time  with  it. 

Senator  Wagner — Except  that  we  have  to  pay  their  expenses  without  any 
power  of  audit. 

Senator  Sage — New  York  is  paying  these  expenses  and  yet  the  City  of 
New  York  has  not  taken  any  interest  in  trying  to  turn  them  over  to  the 
State. 

Senator  Wagner — You  don't  understand  the  situation.  We  have  nothing 
to  do  with  the  Public  Service  Commission  of  the  First  Department  except  to 
pay  their  bills  as  directed  by  legislative  acts.  As  to  how  that  money  is  ex- 
pended the  City  of  New  York  has  no  supervision  of  it  at  all  and  it  is  a  State 
Department  and  you  have  complete  jurisdiction  over  it.  I  hope  the  Senator 
from  the  18th  will  excuse  me  for  the  interruption. 

Senator  Bennett — It  looks  as  if  we  had  finally  come  to  an  unmasking  in  the 
ball  enacted  in  the  City  Hall  by  the  City  of  New  York.  I  declined  to  attend 
a  single  meeting  of  that  rump  legislature  for  the  reason  I  knew  that  it  was  not 
conceived  with  any  possibility  of  bringing  about  any  good,  and  that  thing 
was  stirred  up  by  the  few  men  who  are  now  deploring  the  effect  of  talk  in  New 
York  City  of  a  City  party;  but  the  men  who  are  talking  about  that  are  the 
men  who  brought  it  about  and  I  blame  them  often  enough.  It  is  now  prac- 
tically admitted  New  York  City  will  not  get  relief,  and  those  of  us  who  have 
had  the  common  sense  to  see  that  have  been  pilloried  by  the  papers,  while 
those  who  brought  about  that  situation  have  been  holding  themselves  up  as 
Saviours  of  the  City. 

Senator  Brown  (interrupting) — -Will  the  Senator  yield? 

Senator  Bennett — I  withdraw  from  my  calculations  anj-  relief  for  the  City, 
because  the  City  is  not  going  to  get  any. 

Senator  Brown — ^Mr.  President,  did  it  ever  occur  to  the  Senator  from  the 
18th,  that,  residing  in  the  City  of  New  York,  and  being  a  member  of  the  Fi- 
nance Committee  of  the  Senate,  it  would  have  been  an  excellent  self-appointed 
task  for  him  to  have  prepared  such  a  schedule  so  that  we  could  include  it  in 
the  appropriation  bill? 

Senator  Bennett — A  schedule  of  what? 

Senator  Brown — A  schedule  of  the  regulative  expenses  of  the  Public  Service 
Commission  of  the  City  of  New  York. 

Senator  Bennett— Well,  the  gentleman  is  quite  a  wit,  and  he  has  exhibited 
his  wit  on  a  great  many  occasions.  He  knows  perfectly  well  that  I  am  not  an 
accountant  and  that  it  would  take  a  force  of  accountants  to  work  that  out;  and 
when  the  gentleman  states  that,  I  don't  know  what  his  object  in  asking  a 
question  like  that  is;  the  gentleman  knows  perfectly  well  he  himself  could  not 
go  down  and  make  the  schedule. 

Senator  Brown — I  will. 

Senator  Wagner — Why  don't  you? 

Senator  Brown — Well,  I  had  a  few  other  things. 

Senator  Bennett — If  I  had  pledged  myself  to  give  that  City  relief  and  I  knew 
of  a  way  to  do  it  easily  as  the  Senator  from  the  3.5th  feels,  I  would  have  gone 
and  done  it.  Now  he  has  indicated  that  he  had  no  desire  to  give  New  York 
this  relief  and  it  has  come  down  to  the  situation  that  any  man,  who,  looking 
the  matter  squarely  in  the  face,  knew  was  going  to  happen.  No  relief  for  the 
City,  and  bitterness  between  State  and  City  stirred  up  by  the  people  who 
engineered  this  scheme  for  some  purpose  not  yet  revealed. 

But  I  wall  take  out  of  my  calculation  all  relief  for  the  City  by  any  of  the 
State's  revenues,  or  by  putting  on  the  State  any  of  the  City's  burdens  and  we 
will  discuss  these  figures  as  they  stand,  altering  them  by  adding  two  millions 
for  appropriations  for  outside  bills  and  I  take  it  that  will  be  the  limit.  The 
Senator  from  the  28th  says  it  will  be  slightly  under. 

Senator  Sage — It  may  be  a  great  deal  under.  We  will  call  it  two  miUions 
and  I  will  bring  up  a  few  thousands  somewhere. 

Senator  Bennett— It  says  appropriation  $58,652,000,  revenues  $45,206,000 

8  107 


APPROPRIATIONS     IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 

That  is  a  difference  of  $13,446,000.  The  ten  milUon  surplus  is  capital,  it  is  not 
revenue.  The  State  ought  alwaj's  to  have  a  balance  on  hand  of  three  or  four 
millions  and  I  am  told  it  has  been  customary  to  have  on  hand  a  balance  of  ten 
millions.  The  City  of  Xew  York  does  not  count  itself  safe  unless  it  has  on 
hand  an  average  balance  of  twenty-five  millions,  and  I  was  told  last  year  by 
the  Comptroller,  that  they  like  to  have  a  surplus  of  $10,000,000;  Ijut  we  will 
call  it  three  or  four  millions.  But  certainly  it  ought  to  be  three  or  four  and 
they  have  usually  sought  more. 

Now  there  is  the  difference  of  S13,446,000  excess  of  appropriations  over 
revenues.  Take  out  your  ten  millions  surplus  and  you  have  a  deficit,  called 
here,  balance  to  be  provided,  of  ■'53,299,000.  And  your  two  millions  appro- 
priations on  outside  bills,  and  you  have  S5, 299, 000  to  be  provided.  The 
additional  revenues  proposed  in  these  measures,  assuming  that  you  do  not  give 
(inaudible)  additional  revenue  tax,  new  revenue,  $6,850,000,  which  would 
leave  in  the  Treasury  at  the  end  of  the  year  about  $1,500,000.  Now  we  start 
with  a  million  and  a  half  and  end  with  ten  and  a  half  millions,  and  j'ou  have 
an  appropriation  of  eight  million  and  a  half  in  excess  of  revenue. 

So  taking  your  own  figures,  we  are  appropriating  eight  and  a  half  millions 
in  excess  of  revenue  and  we  get  down  to  a  balance  of  one  and  a  half  millions, 
which  is  below  the  margin  of  safety.  Now  the  war  may  stop  suddenly;  you 
may  not  get  all  this  money  from  stock  transfer  tax;  anything  may  happen;  but 
in  any  event  on  your  own  figures,  we  appropriate  eight  and  a  half  million 
dollars  more  than  our  revenues  and  we  cut  down  a  balance  in  bank  of  ten 
milhon  dollars  to  a  balance  of  a  million  and  a  half.  Now  I  contend  that  is  not 
good  business  management. 

Senator  Sage — Will  the  Senator  3'ield? 

Senator  Bennett — Certainly. 

Senator  Sage — I  would  like  to  saj'  in  that  regard  that  the  case  is  not  quite 
as  bad  as  the  Senator  makes  it  out,  for  two  reasons,  one  of  which  is  that  the 
estimated  revenue,  the  most  conservative  figure  is  alwaj^s  taken.  They  feel 
convinced  they  can  get  somewhat  more  and  perhaps  a  great  deal  more  than  is 
estimated.     These  are  the  figm-es  they  are  perfectlj'  positive  of. 

Senator  Bennett — How  about  five  millions  from  the  stock  transfer  tax? 
It  is  a  tremendous  j'ear  when  the  dealings  on  the  Stock  Exchange — well,  I  have 
not  kept  track  of  the  market  for  some  time,  but  it  is  a  tremendous  year  when 
they  have  run  up  to  two  hundred  miUion  a  year,  and  the  tax  on  that  is  only 
four  million;  the  transfers  outside  do  not  amount  to  much. 

Senator  Sage — We  have  figured  on  what  they  know  they  have  already 
gotten  in. 

Senator  Bennett — If  the  war  should  stop  this  year,  stock  dealings  will  drop 
right  off. 

Senator  Sage — Does  the  Senator  really  think  it  will? 

Senator  Bennett — How  about  returning  the  motor  vehicle  tax  to  localities? 
$1,300,000? 

Senator  Sage — \\'ell,  we  have  added  something.  All  I  can  say  is,  about 
these  figures,  if  we  go  into  each  one  of  these  things  we  are  apt  to  get  into  a 
difficulty  but  after  a  thorough  examination  and  conference  practically  with  all 
the  force  of  the  Comptroller's  office,  they  regard  these  figures  as  absolutely 
certain.  Undoubtedly  the  Governor  will  cut  out  certain  items.  I  can  point 
out  one  or  two  which  he  will  cut  out  and  he  will  unquestionably  diminish  this 
budget  by  something  between  three  and  four  hundred  thousand  dollars, 
probably  four  to  five  himdred  thousand.  With  that  fact  in  consideration, 
and  also  these  figures,  I  tliink  he  will  have  about  three  millions. 

The  other  thing  I  wanted  to  say  was  this.  I  fully  agree  with  the  Senator 
in  his  remarks  about  using  up  the  balance  we  have  left  this  year.  I  don't  think 
it  is  wise.  I  don't  believe  in  going  along  because  we  can  get  through  without 
a  direct  State  tax  and  not  having  a  direct  State  tax.  I  think  we  should  have 
a  direct  State  tax  every  year  that  would  take  care  of  interest  and  sinking  funds, 
and  have  that  known  so  that  the  people  of  the  State  would  know  what  they 
are  paying  taxes  for.  That  would  be  the  proper  way  to  run  the  Government. 
But  you  cannot  argue  that  when  people  can  get  along  without  a  direct  State 
tax.  It  has  always  been  a  shibboleth,  to  get  along  without  a  direct  State  tax 
and  when  people  see  their  way  to  getting  along  without  it  you  cannot  any  more 

108 


MINUTES     OF     THE     SENATE     DEBATE 


get  them  to  do  it  than  to  fly.     I  don't  agree  with  that  and  I  am  perfectly 
wilhng  to  say  so  pubhcly.     But  you  can  get  along  without  it. 

Senator  Bennett — We  have  already  passed  a  bill  reappropriating  .162,500  to 
the  Plattsburgh  Centennial.  Why  do  you  put  that  in  this  bill?  It  is  on  page 
628  of  the  bill.  And  we  have  ah'eady  passed  Senator  Emerson's  bill,  and 
signed  by  the  Governor,  appropriating  it  once  before. 

Senator  Sage — I  wanted  to  prove  that  Senator  Emerson  is  a  good  legislator. 
I  think  he  wants  to  be  perfectly  sure. 

Senator  Emerson — The  Governor  has  a  perfect  privilege  to  cut  that  oiit. 

Senator  Sage — And  I  think  he  will  probably  do  so.  That  will  be  part  of  the 
$500,000  of  which  I  spoke. 

Senator  Bennett — I  am  glad  to  see  that  in  the  ultimate  analysis  the  Senator 
from  the  28th  places  his  confidence  in  the  Governor. 

Senator  Sage— It  would  not  make  any  difference  if  he  did  or  not;  it  is  a  re- 
appropriation. 

Senator  Bennett — Now  I  forgot  to  call  attention  to  the  fact  that  this  body 
last  week  passed  a  bill  to  return  to  the  localities  one  half  of  the  motor  vehicle 
tax,  one  million,  three  hundred  thousand  dollars,  the  total  tax.  In  this  bill 
the  total  motor  vehicle  tax  is  put  at  $2,673,000,  and  the  plan  is  to  return  half. 
That  wipes  out  your  balance.  Your  bank  balance  is  wiped  out.  So  therefore 
you  have  got  $10,000,000  appropriated  at  least  more  than  revenue. 

But  I  think  as  a  result  of  this  discussion  and  these  admissions  we  are  pretty 
well  convinced  that  we  are  appropriating  a  good  many  more  millions  than  our 
revenues.  It  is  not  good  business  policy  or  economical  principle  and  it  is  not 
good  party  politics.  And  the  second  point  is  that  j'our  present  appropriation 
bill  is  unworkable  because  your  budget  is  segregated,  it  is  more  cast-iron  than 
the  Governor's  appropriation  bill  and  you  have  no  power  of  transfer  lodged  in 
anybody,  and  in  my  opinion  the  result  of  this  appropriation  bill  is  going  to 
throw  all  of  the  departments  into  confusion  before  the  legislature  meets  again. 

Senator  Wagner — Mr.  President,  it  is  rather  discouraging  to  discuss  a  biU 
such  as  is  now  before  us  under  these  circumstances.  In  the  first  place,  this  is 
the  most  important  bill  we  pass  this  year.  This  is  the  bill  which  appropriates 
the  moneys  of  the  State  which  the  taxpayers  will  have  to  pay  into  the  State 
Treasury  and  yet  in  the  Senate  we  have  probably  ten  or  twelve  Senators 
listening  or  at  all  interested  in  this  discussion.  The  pubhc  filling  the  galleries 
and  the  members  in  the  front  row  seem  to  have  more  interest  in  the  contents 
of  this  legislation,  as  to  whether  it  involves  extravagance  or  not,  than  the 
Senators  upon  whom  devolves  the  duty  of  carefully  scrutinizing  the  proposi- 
tions, the  appropriations  in  this  bill.  Secondly,  we  are  asked  as  a  mere  per- 
functory matter  to  discuss  this  appropriation  bill,  because  whatever  may  be 
pointed  out,  it  has  already  been  decided  that  the  bill  is  to  be  passed  in  its 
present  form  and  there  must  be  no  amendments  made;  the  Governor  will  give 
in  no  emergency  message;  and  therefore  it  is  on  the  road  to  final  passage,  no 
matter  what  may  be  said  against  it. 

I  deem  it  my  duty,  however,  to  point  out  a  few  of  the  misrepresentations 
which  we  made  last  year  when  the  appropriation  bill  was  passed  and  when  the 
size  of  the  appropriation  bill  was  criticised  severely,  and  attacked  by  the 
minority  members  of  this  body  as  being  extravagant.  I  desire  to  point  out 
the  fact  that  last  year  the  answer  was  made  to  us  in  the  minority  that  the 
appropriation  bill,  up  to  sixty-three  millions,  was  necessary,  not  for  the  admin- 
istration of  the  fiscal  year  to  be  conducted  by  the  Republican  Administration, 
but  it  was  necessary  to  make  up  a  deficiency  of  eleven  millions  left  by  a  care- 
less and  an  incompetent  Democratic  Administration.  If  that  be  true,  of 
course,  and  if  there  were  anj'  economies  exercised  in  the  departments  under  the 
Republican  Administration,  this  appropriation  bill  should  be  at  least  eleven 
million  dollars  less  than  the  appropriation  bill  of  last  year.  Is  that  a  fact? 
No,  it  is  not.  And  the  reason  for  that  is  the  statement  made  last  year  that  the 
size  of  the  appropriation  bill  was  due  to  a  deficiency  of  eleven  million  dollars 
left  by  a  Democratic  Admmistration,  was  false,  was  untrue,  and  it  was  given 
to  the  people  as  a  misleading  statement  behind  which  to  cover  up  political 
extravagance.  The  appropriation  bill  last  year  was  $63,000,000.  The  appro- 
priation bill  this  year — 

109 


APPROPRIATIONS    IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 

(Interruption  by  gavel)     President  Schoeneck — The  Senator  will  proceed. 

Senator  Wagner — Mr.  President,  I  cannot  talk  and  have  everj-one  around  me 
talking. 

President  Shoeneck — The  Chair  asks  the  Sergeant-at-Arms  to  see  that  the 
conversation  ceases  in  the  chamber. 

Senator  Wagner — The  appropriation  bill  last  year  was  $63,000,000.  The 
appropriation  bill  this  year  with  the  special  bills  and  the  bill  that  is  now  before 
us,  when  these  are  passed,  will  amount  to  a  little  more  than  $60,000,000. 

Senator  Sage — Less. 

Senator  Wagner — Well,  one  hundred  thousand  dollars  less  than  $60,000,000, 
80  that  the  difference  between  last  year's  appropriation  bill  and  this  year's  bill 
will  be  about  $3,000,000.  Now  that  $3,000,000  is  less  than  the  difference 
between  the  appropriation  bill  of  last  year  and  the  $3,600,000  we  appropriated 
to  make  up,  it  was  alleged,  was  needed  to  complete  our  canal  work. 

Senator  Sage  (interrupting) — Oh,  Mr.  President,  I  wish  to  draw  the  Senator's 
attention  to  the  fact  that  that  was  a  special  bill. 

Senator  Wagner — I  am  counting  that.  I  say  $63,000,000.  It  includes 
$3,600,000  of  the  canal  appropriation.  It  includes  the  canal  appropriation. 
I  am  not  so  unfamiliar  with  the  figures  as  all  that.  Now  one  of  the  ways  of 
determining  whether  there  was  extravagance  or  not  is  to  compare  the  admin- 
istration expenses.  The  administration  expenses  for  the  last  year  of  Governor 
Glynn's  administration,  appropriated  by  Governor  Glynn's  administration, 
was  $30,000,000.  Last  year  it  was  $32,000,000.  Two  millions  more  than  the 
last  Democratic  administration.  This  year  it  is  $37,000,000,  seven  milUon 
more  than  the  last  Democratic  administration  and  yet  we  are  told  that  we, 
our  present  administration,  is  the  economical  administration,  and  the  Glynn 
administration  was  the  extravagant  administration  and  within  two  years, 
within  two  years  you  have  increased  the  administration  expenses  in  the  State 
by  seven  million  dollars.  Now  don't  try  to  deceive  anybody  or  try  to  make 
any  pretense  of  economy.     You  are  extravagant  and  grossly  extravagant. 

The  Senator  will  no  doubt  want  to  know  how  I  make  up  seven  million.  He 
will  admit  that  the  administration  expenses  this  year  are  $35,000,000  in  the 
appropriation  bill,  but  then  you  include  two  more  millions  in  changing  the 
fiscal  year  from  October  to  July,  ordinarily  four  miUions.  AH  the  administra- 
tion expenses  outside  of  salaries  would  lapse.  You  lapse  four  million  in  salaries 
that  of  course  cannot  be  paid  after  July  1.  They  lapse.  Then  there  is  four 
million  left  for  temporary  service  and  the  purchase  of  supplies  and  things  of 
that  kind.  That  ought  to  lapse,  but  what  happens?  You  don't  lapse  it,  but 
you  say  two  millions  of  that  we  will  keep  and  we  will  appropriate  for  depart- 
ment expenses  incurred  previous  to  July  1.  That  makes  another  two  millions. 
It  is  a  very  happy  and  ingenious  way  of  giving  the  department  two  millions 
more  for  administration  and  their  particular  functions. 

Senator  Sage — What  two  millions  do  j'ou  mean?     I  don't  understand  that. 

Senator  Wagner — You  leave  two  million  of  the  Administration  expenses 
which  ordinarily  should  lapse  to  make  up  for  expense  incurred  before  July  1. 
Look  at  your  yellow  sheet  and  you  will  see  it  somewhere. 

Senator  Sage — I  don't  understand  what  you  are  driving  at. 

Senator  Wagner — Well,  I  am  sorry.  Here  it  is,  "Less  reserve  estimated  for 
obhgations  June  30,  1916,  $2,000,000." 

Senator  Sage — That  is  in  every  estimate. 

Senator  Wagner — Oh,  no;  it  has  never  been  in  any  bill  before.  That  you 
are  doing  because  you  are  changing  your  fiscal  years;  but  this  ought  to  lapse — 

Senator  Sage — That  has  been  in  every  estimate  that  the  Comptroller  has 
furnished,  in  my  time,  and  the  reason  is  this:  The  two  millions  or  whatever 
sum  is  necessary  for  unexpended  balances  of  former  appropriations,  principally 
in  the  building,  in  the  construction  of  various  institutions  of  the  State — 

Senator  Wagner — Now,  Mr.  President,  this  has  nothing  to  do  with  construc- 
tion, because  none  of  your  construction  appropriations  lapse.  They  all  go  on. 
This  is  for  administrative  affairs. 

Senator  Sage — They  don't  go  on. 

Senator  Wagner — Now  if  the  Senator  will  make  inquiry  over  night — I  have 
looked  into  this — he  will  agree  with  me  tomorrow  morning. 

Senator  Sage — The  same  item  was  in  last  year,  and  when  the  Senator  says 

110 


MINUTES     OF     THE     SENATE    DEBATE 


the  appropriations  for  construction  do  not  lapse,  if  he  will  think  for  a  moment 
he  will  know  that  is  wrong,  because  they  are  lapsing  every  year. 

Senator  Wagner — What  I  mean  is  your  appropriation  of  last  year  in  your 
appropriation  bill. 

Senator  Sage— That  does  not  lapse,  of  course,  but  there  are  others  lapsing 
from  the  previous — 

Senator  Wagner — You  don't  have  to  leave  any  reserve  for  expenditures  for 
construction.  I  will  not  argue  with  the  Senator  any  more  because  I  know  I 
am  right  and  the  Senator  will  know  between  now  and  tomorrow  morning  that 
I  am  right. 

Senator  Sage — There  is  no  use  of  saying  that.  I  know  that  he  is  wrong,  Mr. 
President.     I  know  I  am  right. 

Senator  W^agner — The  amounts  which  would  ordinarily  be  paid  for  salaries 
between  June  1  and  October  1,  would  lapse? 

Senator  Sage — Yes. 

Senator  Wagner — The  four  million  for  expenses  of  administration,  purchase 
of  material  and  other  things  would  lapse? 

Senator  Sage — They  certainly  do.     I  have  not  figured  that  up. 

Senator  Wagner — Figure  it  up,  and  you  will  find  instead  of  lapsing  four 
million  you  lapse  two  million  and  you  keep  two  million.  That  is  what  makes 
your  administrative  expenses  seven  miUions  more  than  was  appropriated  in 
1914. 

It  is  really  amusing  to  one  who  analyzes  these  figures  to  remember  the  dis- 
cussions on  "the  appropriations  last  year;  how  this  year  we  were  going  to  have 
an  economical  administration  and  the  Governor  in  his  message  and  the  Sena- 
tor from  the  35th  and  the  Senator  from  the  28th  upon  the  floor  said  we  are 
making  up  eleven  millions  or  more  of  deficit,  of  debts  that  you  owe  that  we  are 
paying'and  that  is  the  reason  for  our  large  appropriation  bill;  otherwise  it  would 
be  eleven  millions  less  than  it  is.  Now  that  was  sixty-three  millions  in  all. 
This  year  you  cannot  hide  behind  that  mistake  and  yet  your  appropriation  bill 
this  year  is  sixty  millions  and  the  difference  between  sixty  millions  this  year 
and  the  sixty-three  millions  of  last  year  is  the  three  millions,  six  hundred 
thousand  dollars  you  appropriated  out  of  current  revenue  to  complete  the  con- 
tract upon  the  canal,  and  that  year  a  $27,000,000  bond  issue  was  approved  by 
the  people  and  you  took  the  money  received  as  a  result  of  that  bond  issue  and 
paid  back  into  the  general  fund. 

Now  then,  if  it  be  true  that  last  year  you  needed  eleven  millions  of  that 
money  to  pay  up  our  debts,  my  heavens,  how  extravagant  you  have  grown 
since  then.  Now  I  commend  to  the  careful  consideration  of  the  Senators  the 
administrative  expenses,  and  in  nearly  every  department  of  the  State  govern- 
ment there  is  an  increase  this  year  over  the  appropriation  of  1914  for  admin- 
istrative expenses.     Who  was  extravagant  and  who  is  economical? 

In  your  Department  of  Agriculture  alone — I  would  better  quote  the  exact 
figures,  because  the  Senator  will  say  I  am  mistaken  again — and  if  he  challenges 
them  he  will  have  to  challenge  his  own  appropriation  bill.  I  just  spoke  of  the 
Agricultural  Department.  The  increase  over  last  year  in  the  Agricultural 
Department  is  $362,338,  with  no  additional  functions  given  them  by  any  law 
that  I  can  remember  having  voted  for  last  year  or  this  year,  and,  Mr.  President, 
$88,000  of  that  $362,000  is  for  salary  increases  or  the  creation  of  new  places  in 
that  department. 

Senator  Sage — The  Agricultural  Department? 

Senator  Wagner — Yes,  sir.  Get  out  your  sheets,  because  I  have  had  some 
experience  with  sheets.  That  is  only  one  department.  Now  who  is  extrava- 
gant? The  1914  Administration?  Or  the  now  renowned  Republican  Admin- 
istration?    $362,000. 

Senator  Sage — Mr.  President,  I  don't  see  where  he  gets  those  figures  from. 
The  Department  of  Agriculture,  the  1916  bill  as  compared  with  the  1915  bill, 
shows  a  decrease. 

Senator  Wagner— 1915,  in  1915,  you  gave  $1,249,606  for  the  Department  of 
Agriculture. 

Senator  Sage — That  is  perfectly  ridiculous. 

Senator  Wagner — All  right. 

Senator  Sage — Well,  it  is. 

Ill 


APPROPRIATIONS     IX     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 


Senator  Wagner — I  got  the  figures  out  of  your  appropriation  bill.  Then 
your  appropriation  bill  is  perfectly  ridiculous. 

Senator  Sage — I  have  an  idea  that  he  is  taking  into  consideration  all  of  the 
Agricultural  schools. 

Senator  Wagner^I  have  taken  into  consideration  everj'thing  that  has  to  do 
with  agriculture. 

Senator  Sage— That  is  a  different  thing.  The  increase  is  S38,000  and  I  can 
tell  in  a  moment  what  the  overhead  expenses  are.  The  Department  of  Agri- 
culture, the  appropriation  bill,  the  increased  overhead  expense  as  compared 
with  last  year  is  $14,737,  and  I  can  tell  you  exactlv  how  that  happened  to 
occur. 

Senator  Wagner — Will  you  tell  us? 

Senator  Sage— Well,  I  will  tell  you  just  that  one  thing.  The  retiring  head 
of  the  Department  of  Agriculture,  a  Democrat,  was  a  friend  of  the  Senator  who 
sits  at  my  left  (Senator  Wagner)  and  he,  in  making  up  the  budget,  as  you  know 
Mr.  Wilson  had  come  in,  a  new  man,  and  knew  nothing  about  it,  and  the 
former  head  of  the  Department  who  was  about  to  retire,  went  through  the  bill 
and  showed  him  where  he  could  cut  this  out,  and  cut  that  out,  and  he  took  the 
figures  and  he  made  a  great  mistake.  It  was  put  over  on  the  incoming  head 
and  he  did  not  have  enough  money  and  when  he  found  out  he  came  to  us  and 
we  made  him  that  modest  increase.     That's  how  it  happened. 

Senator  Wagner— Well,  the  Senator  does  not  know  all  about  the  Depart- 
ment of  Agriculture,  and  I  know  a  little  more  about  it.  I  know  the  number  of 
men  turned  out  and  others  put  in  their  places  and  increases  in  their  salaries. 
I  remember  one  case  of  Mr.  .\nderson,  a  good  gentleman  who  went  into  the 
department  at  $1,500  a  year,  and  when  he  was  there  two  months  he  was  paid 
$3,000  a  year  and  his  salary  in  the  new  bill  is  $3,000  a  year  and  I  will  ask  the 
Senator  to  go  over  the  figures  again  between  now  and  tomorrow. 

Senator  Sage — I  don't  have  to. 

Senator  Wagner — Well,  I  know. 

Now  your  Tax  Commission  in  1914  got  $189,200.     This  year  it  is  $2.57,620. 

Senator  Sage — The  total  appropriations  for  the  Tax  Department,  com- 
pared with  last  year,  show  a  decrease  in  this  bill  of  $56,723. 

Senator  Wagner— Last  year  it  was  $253,200.     This  year  it  is  $257,620. 

Senator  Sage — May  I  ask  the  Senator  whether  he  is  counting  the  amount 
in  the  supply  bill? 

Senator  Wagner — I  am  counting  your  whole  amount. 

Senator  Sage — That  we  had  to  make  immediatelv  available.  The  appro- 
priation bill  and  supply  bill  together  of  last  year;  ff  you  put  them  both  to- 
gether, you  will  find  them  much  larger  than  the  appropriation  alone. 

Senator  Wagner — What  I  am  counting  is  what  they  received  for  the  expend- 
iture of  that  particular  year.  I  notice  in  the  Educational  Department — there 
may  be  a  good  reason  for  it — vou  have  got  an  increase  of  $946,121  over  1914, 
and  $402,000  over  last  year. 

Senator  Sage— The  increase  this  year  is  $267,419— and  does  the  Senator 
wish  to  have  that  explained? 

Senator  Wagner — You  can  explain  it  afterwards.  I  am  just  pointing  out 
these  increases. 

In  your  Prison  Department,  you  have  an  increase  over  1914  of  $365,000, 
haven't  you?     And  a  net  increase  over  last  year  of  $29,000? 

Senator  Sage — I  haven't  got  the  1914  figures. 

Senator  Wagner — They  are  quite  important  to  have. 

Senator  Sage — In  the  State  Prisons  (looking  over  papers),  in  the  Prison 
Department  the  figures  run  $3,.323,000— if  you  are  includmg  State  Prisons — 
State  Prisons  (consulting  sheets)  there  is  an  increase  of  $1,406,000- but  those 
are  total  appropriations. 

Senator  Wagner — Have  you  the  figures  over  1914? 

Senator  Sage — No. 

Senator  Wagner — My  figures  show  an  increase  over  1914  of  $365,000. 

Well,  I  am  not  going  to  weary  the  Senate  with  these  figures.  I  know,  no 
matter  what  I  say,  it  is  not  going  to  have  any  effect  anj-^-here;  it  is  not  going 
to  change  the  approjiriation  bill;  you  are  determined  toappropriate  it;  but  on 
the    total   administrative    expenses,    your   expenditures,    without    including 

112 


MINUTES     OF     THE     SENATE     DEBATE 


additional  functions  of  government,  in  two  years,  including  the  two  millions 
about  which  the  Senator  will  agree  with  me  tomorrow  morning,  have  increased 
by  seven  million  dollars,  which  is  an  absolutely  abnormal  increase. 

Now  taking  the  sinking  funds:  You  could  easily  decrease  that  by  at  least 
$5,000,000;  the  contribution  into  the  sinking  fund,  and  thus  we  leave  the  possi- 
bility of  a  tremendous  direct  tax  next  year  or  have  a  good  sized  surplus  so 
as  to  prevent  a  direct  tax  next  year.  In  sinking  fund  No.  2  and  No.  3  you 
recognize  the  principle  which  I  am  about  to  advocate  with  reference  to  the 
other  sinking  funds — he  shakes  his  head  again  (referring  to  Senator  Sage)  you 
don't  make  any  appropriation  into  the  sinking  fund  No.  2  or  No.  3.  I  may 
be  wrong  as  to  the  numbers — but  there  are  two  funds  into  which  you  make 
no  appropriation  this  year  at  all  either  as  a  contribution  to  amortize  the 
principal  of  the  bond  or  to  pay  the  interest  of  the  bonds  for  which  it  was 
created.     Am  I  right  or  wrong? 

Senator  Sage — No,  Mr.  President,  he  is  wrong,  I  will  show  you.  On  page 
624,  lines  22  and  25:  No,  what  was  done  is  this:  Those  are  the  only  two  of  the 
sinking  funds  where  by  law  it  is  not  provided  that  the  amount  of  contribution 
to  the  sinking  fund  itself  and  the  interest  have  not  got  to  be  figured  entirely 
together,  but  in  those  two  and  only  those  two  can  be  figured  separately.  It 
was  provided  that  in  all  of  the  others  that  such  and  such  an  amount  for  interest 
and  an  amount  necessary  to  pay  principal  should  be  paid  in.  Here  it  is 
separately  provided. 

Senator  Wagner — If  the  Senator  will  pardon  me,  I  don't  catch  his  point. 
All  interest  must  be  figured  and  paid. 

Senator  Sage — I  mean  the  contribution  and  interest,  it  is  provided  for  every- 
one except  these  two. 

Senator  Wagner — Aren't  you  using  the  excess  in  those  sinking  funds  for  the 
payment  of  interest  on  outstanding  bonds? 

Senator  Sage — No,  we  are  not. 

Senator  Wagner — Wait  a  minute,  maybe  I  can  clear  it  up. 

Senator  Sage — I  can  clear  it  up  in  a  minute. 

Senator  Wagner — Can  you  show  me  where  you  are  appropriating  interest 
for  all  those  bonds? 

Senator  Sage — For  six  months  interest  on  the  two  bond  issues,  Nos.  2  and  3, 
the  interest  falls  due  in  March  and  September.  We  are  appropriating  only 
the  interest  through  March  1917,  because  the  September  interest  will  be  taken 
care  of  in  the  next  appropriation  bill. 

Senator  Wagner — This  is  the  appropriation  out  of  sinking  funds?  I  am 
speaking  of  the  appropriation  that  you  make  into  the  sinking  fund.  The 
Senator  knows  the  difference,  of  course.  Where  is  your  separate  bill  that  you 
passed?     Is  not  there  a  bill  on  the  calendar? 

Senator  Sage — No,  I  am  speaking  about  the  necessary  appropriations  which 
have  to  be  appropriated  into  the  sinking  fund  before  it  can  be  appropriated 
out — 

Senator  Bennett — May  I  ask  a  question?  You  said  that  the  September 
interest  would  be  taken  care  of  in  the  next  appropriation  bill,  which  is  not 
the  1917  interest,  it  is  the  1916  interest.  How  do  you  take  care  of  September, 
1916? 

Senator  Sage — No,  it  is  September,  1917. 

Senator  Bennett — How  do  you  take  care  of  (inaudible)  where  is  the  money? 

Senator  Sage — The  money  comes  out  of  taxes. 

Senator  Bennett — The  direct  tax  has  not  yet  come  in  and  yet — 

Senator  Sage — It  is  not  a  question  of  the  money  you  have,  but  the  money 
you  are  going  to  have  throughout  the  year.  Of  course  we  have  ten  millions 
on  hand  now. 

Senator  Bennett — That  is  ten  millions  surplus.     The  dii'ect  tax. 

Senator  Sage — Direct  tax  and  indirect  tax. 

Senator  Bennett — Not  all  are  in? 

Senator  Sage — Oh,  no. 

Senator  Bennett— But  they  will  help  make  up  that  ten  million  funds? 

Senator  Sage — Yes,  sir. 

Senator  Bennett — And  this  September  interest  is  to  be  paid  out  of  it? 

Senator  Sage— No,  that  is  the  amount  of  money  that  we  will  have  that  will 


113 


APPROPRIATIONS     IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 

be  unmortgaged.  (Inaudible.)  This  merely  does  not  take  care  of  next 
year's  appropriation,  which  will  come  out  of  next  year's  bill,  and  if  you  will 
figure  out  you  will  see  this  is  so  by  taking  the  amount  (referring  to  sheets) 
$2,250,000.     We  take  out  one  half  of  that. 

Senator  Wagner — Will  the  Senator  be  good  enough  to  send  for  the  special 
sinking  fund  bill  which  he  introduced  and  which  is  now  upon  third  reading 
calendar? 

Without  going  into  all  the  details,  perhaps  I  can  present  what  I  want  to  the 
Senate,  maintaining  that  we  could  reduce  the  sinking  fund  by  at  least  five 
million  dollars. 

The  Senator  will  concede  that  in  most  of  our  sinking  funds,  with  exception 
of  those  which  have  been  recently  created,  there  is  an  excess  over  and  above 
what  would  be  required  under  the  actuarial  tables  to  meet  the  indebtedness 
at  maturity.  I  am  right  about  that.  In  other  words,  while  it  is  estimated 
by  all  tables  that  there  should  be  in  our  sinking  funds  about  twelve  million 
dollars  to  meet  on  this  date,  there  is  actually  in  these  sinking  funds  about 
forty-one  millions,  or  an  excess  of  about  twenty-nine  millions.  The  Comp- 
troller's report  will  show  that  to  be  absolutely  true. 

Now  the  point  I  make  is  this:  In  the  first  place,  these  twenty-nine  mil- 
lions were  exacted  unjustly  from  the  taxpayers.  They  should  only  have 
been  required  to  pay  into  the  sinking  fund  twelve  million  dollars.  Instead  of 
that  there  has  been  exti'acted  from  them  unjustly  the  sum  of  forty-one  mil- 
lion or  forty-two  million,  whatever  it  may  be.  Now  the  sinking  funds  of  our 
State,  different  from  municipal  funds,  are  for  two  purposes,  to  amortize  the 
bonds  at  maturity,  and  secondly,  to  pay  the  interest  upon  the  bonds  annually. 
In  other  words,  there  is  a  two-fold  purpose.  Now  what  I  contend  is  this: 
That  if  in  any  one  year  we  pay  into  the  sinking  fund  a  sum  in  excess  of  that 
which  is  required  to  be  there,  we  can  use  some  of  the  excess  to  pay  the  interest 
upon  the  bonds  in  the  following  year. 

Now  does  the  Senator  agree  with  me  on  that  point?     Why  not? 

Senator  Sage — Mr.  President,  because  the  interest  and  the  amounts  paid 
in  for  the  amortization  or  bonds,  are  two  entirely  different  matters.  As  I 
understand  it,  the  sinking  fund  requires  that  any  amount  paid  in  for  the  amor- 
tizing of  the  bonds,  stays  there,  and  I  don't  believe,  personally,  that  it  can 
be  used  for  any  other  purpose. 

Senator  Wagner — The  Senator  has  not  looked  into  the  constitutional  pro- 
visions for  sinking  funds.  Every  single  sinking  fund  that  is  created  is  for  two 
purposes,  to  pay  the  bond  at  maturity  and  the  interest.  Now  that  being  the 
purpose  for  which  the  fund  is  created,  surely  any  money  paid  into  that  fund 
I  can  use  for  either  of  those  purposes.     Is  not  that  true? 

Senator  Sage — Mr.  Chairman,  I  am  not  a  lawyer,  as  the  Senator  from  the 
16th  well  knows;  and  I  can  only  regard  this  as  I  would  any  business  trans- 
action, if  I  found  anybody  to  issue  bonds  with  a  provision  that  a  certain  amount 
should  be  set  aside  each  j^ear  for  amortizing  and  interest,  and  I  found  that  the 
people  doing  that  were  robbing  the  amortizing  amounts  to  pay  the  interest, 
I  would  get  rid  of  the  bonds  as  quickly  as  I  could  and  I  would  never  buy 
another  issue  from  that  house. 

Senator  Wagner — Mr.  President,  that  is  the  most  absurd  statement  that 
can  be  made  to  anybody  famiUar  with  State  finances  or  with  these  funds. 

Now,  Mr.  President,  does  the  Senator  know  why  there  is  this  tremendous 
excess  in  sinking  funds?  Because  of  mistakes  made  by  clerks  in  the  Comp- 
troller's office  that  nobodv  has  the  courage  to  correct,  and  the  mistakes  are  as 
follows:  No.  2:  The  fir.st  is  this:  That  your  fund  was  created,  $101,000,000 
canal  bonds,  and  upon  the  issue  of  five  million  of  canal  bonds,  the  contribu- 
tion into  the  sinking  fund  was  made  as  if  the  whole  $101,000,000  canal  bonds 
had  been  issued.  A  ridiculous  mistake,  that  resulted  in  tremendous  excess. 
Now,  to  say  that  that  mistake,  having  once  been  made,  and  the  taxpayer  hav- 
ing had  extracted  from  him  illegally  this  money  that  we  in  the  future  cannot 
correct  that  error,  to  me  is  a  most  absurd  assertion,  especially  as  using  the 
money  to  pay  interest  is  using  the  monej'  for  the  purpose  for  which  the  bond 
was  created  and  that  is  the  only  limitation  so  far  as  the  use  of  sinking  fund 
moneys  is  concerned.  Now  this  matter  was  up  in  the  Constitutional  Conven- 
tion and  it  was  practically  agreed  that  so  far  as  the  legality  of  it  was  concerned, 

114 


MINUTES     OF     THE     SENATE     DEBATE 


it  could  be  done,  but  somebody  feared  that  somebody  would  feel  that  the 
security  had  been  tampered  with.  A  most  absurd  statement.  The  only  one 
that  this  excess  can  help  is  the  bond  speculator  and  the  only  one  protected  in 
keeping  this  tremendous  excess  is  the  New  York  bond  speculator  and  nobody  else. 
Now  if  you  would  be  reasonable  about  this  excess.  I  am  sure  there  is  not  a  bank- 
ing institution  in  the  State,  if  this  were  properly  presented,  which  would  not  con- 
sent to  having  partof  that  money  used  for  the  purpose  of  paying  the  interest  this 
year  and  j'ou  could  reduce  your  appropriation  bill  at  least  five  million  dollars. 

Now  I  would  like  to  present  this  suggestion.  I  know  you  are  not  going  to 
adopt  it.  You  have  made  up  your  minds  that  this  bill  is  going  through,  word 
for  word,  no  matter  what  arguments  are  presented;  you  are  going  to  push  it 
through  and  we  will  have  to  rely  upon  the  Governor  to  reduce  it.  I  think  he 
will.  By  the  way,  in  vour  statement  vou  say  you  increased  the  budget  of  the 
Governor  by  SI, 800,000— or  was  it  $1,700,000. 

Senator  Sage — I  am  so  used  to  talking  in  millions  now  that  a  milUon  or  two 
means  nothing  to  me.     (Laughter.) 

Senator  Wagner — Then  j'ou  have  a  clear  recollection  of  that? 

Senator  Sage — I  have  it  right  here.  The  total  of  the  Governor's  bill  was 
$57,161,000.  The  total  of  this  bill  is  $58,653,000— a  difference  of  about  $1,500,- 
000.  And  then  we  were  honest  enough  to  point  out  $1,020,000  which  was  in- 
crease in  debt  service,  so  that  made  it  $2,500,000. 

Senator  Wagner — Well,  I  don't  recall  that  particular  provision  in  j'our 
statement.  The  statement  issued  to  the  press  was  that  the  budget  had  been 
increased  $1,020,000;  but  as  a  matter  of  fact — 

Senator  Sage — Mr.  President,  I  just  stated  the  facts,  and  he  tries  to  con- 
trovert it.  But  I  have  the  original  statement  here.  The  total  is  $58,617,000, 
an  increase  over  the  Governor's  budget  of  $1,491,961;  besides  this  there  has 
been  saved  $1,500,000  due  to  contributing  (inaudible,  reading  from  Finance 
bill  and  report ) . 

Senator  Wagner — That  is  a  little  different  from  the  figures  as  carried  by  the 
press  of  $1,600,000. 

Senator  Sage — I  am  not  responsible  for  the  press. 

Senator  Wagner — It  is  really  more,  because  j'ou  cut  down  the  sinking 
fund,  the  interest  upon  the  bonds,  by  three  months  or  more? 

Senator  Sage — The  only  difference  is  this:  One  million,  really,$l, 020,000, 
instead  of  $1,015,000.     That  is  the  only  difference. 

Senator  Wagner — Well,  that  is  a  good  deal  of  money  to  me. 

Senator  Sage — I  have  just  pointed  out  that — 

Senator  Wagner — So  as  a  matter  of  fact,  your  budget,  the  actual  budget,  is 
greater  than  the  Governor's,  by  two  and  a  half  million  dollars? 

Senator  Sage — Yes. 

Senator  Wagner— I  would  like  to  ask  why  he  gets  in  $179,000  for  mainte- 
nance of  county  roads?  We  have  passed  a  bill  repealing  Section  178  of  the 
Highway  Law,  which  provides  for  the  maintenance  of  county  roads,  a  bill 
introduced  by  the  Senator  from  the  35th.  The  Senator  recalls  a  bill,  repealing 
Section  178  of  the  Highway  Law?  And  yet  in  the  appropriation  bill  we  have 
$179,000,  making  an  appropriation  for  maintenance  of  county  roads. 

Senator  Sage — In  case  there  is  enough  appropriated  in  this  bill,  it  is  unnec- 
essary. It  undoubtedly  will  be  cut  out.  The  Finance  and  Ways  and  Means 
has  not  been  in  the  Senate  much  this  Winter;  if  some  laws  were  passed  while 
we  were  absent,  we  are  hardly  responsible,  and  the  thing  will  be  attended  to 
by  the  Governor. 

Senator  Wagner — I  am  sorry  you  have  to  rely  on  the  Governor  to  correct 
all  your  evil  doings.  There  are  a  good  many  other  details  I  am  not  going  into, 
with  reference  to  the  appropriation :  Your  omnibus  appropriation  to  the  Super- 
intendent of  Public  Works,  with  which  he  can  do  anything  with  $200,000 — you 
have  never  before  given  quite  the  money  in  such  a  limitless  manner. 

Senator  Sage — Will  you  call  my  attention  to  the  page? 

Senator  Wagner — I  haven't  it.  I  have  it  in  mind,  but  I  don't  recall  the  exact 
page,  but  you  remember  the  appropriation?  The  Superintendent  of  Public 
Works?  Then  you  have  an  appropriation  that  you  don't  have  there  as, 
$360,000,  taxed  upon  forest  lands.  Last  year  it  was  two  hundred  thousand 
and  some  odd  thousand  dollars. 


115 


APPROPRIATIONS     I.X     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 

Senator  Sage — I  recall  that  these  figures  were  given  us,  put  in  the  exact 
amount  of  money  necessary  to  paj'  the  taxes,  and  therefore  we  put  that  in. 

Senator  Wagner — I  was  asking  how  they  increased  by  over  a  hundred  thou- 
sand dollars? 

Senator  Sage — The  taxes  all  over  the  State  have  increased. 

Senator  Wagner ^This  is  a  tax  we  pay  to  a  locality.  Those  should  never 
be  paid  by  the  State,  in  my  judgment. 

Senator  Sage — Well,  that  is  a  matter  of  opinion. 

Senator  Wagner — But  nowhere  else  in  the  State  are  the  lands  taxed  except 
the  forest  preserves. 

Senator  Sage — Well,  the  Senator  knows  the  situation  and  it  would  be  abso- 
lutely impossible  for  those  people  to  exist  if  they  had  to  pay  all  the  taxes  so 
that  is — 

Senator  Wagner — They  don't  maintain  the  forests;  the  State  does  that;  and 
the  State  bought  the  forests — 

Senator  Sage — But  they  have  to  have  tools. 

Senator  W^agner — They  should  not  be  treated  differently  from  other  forests 
in  the  State. 

Senator  Sage — Mr.  President,  I  thought  he  had  been  in  the  Adirondacks. 

Senator  Wagner — I  have. 

Senator  Sage — Then,  why  talk  about  it? 

Senator  Wagner — There  is  no  justification  for  it,  any  more  than  there  is  for 
New  York  City  to  ask  you  to  pay  taxes  for  the  maintenance  of  a  State  Hos- 
pital or  some  other  institution  down  there  upon  City  property. 

Senator  Sage — Or  Albany,  because  the  Capital  is  located  here.  Mr.  Pres- 
ident, Mr.  Chairman,  I  am  merely  showing  that  we  are  not  trying  to  get  any- 
thing out  of  the  way  for  Albany.  We  never  have.  You  see  very  plainly  we 
have  not  asked  the  State  to  pay  taxes. 

Senator  Emerson — Will  the  Senator  from  the  16th  answer  one  question  on 
the  forest  lands  question? 

The  Chairman — The  Senator  refuses  to  yield. 

Senator  Wagner — If  I  thought  the  Senator  had  followed  this  discussion  and 
was  really  considering  these  appropriation  bills,  I  would  yield. 

Now  I  am  not  going  to  offer  amendments  as  I  am  not  going  through  a  per- 
functory proceeding;  I  merelv  point  out  the  fact  that  our  appropriations  this 
year  are  $60,000,000  and  last  year  $63,000,000;  that  the  administrative  ex- 
penses have  increased  $7,000,000  since  the  last  Democratic  Administration. 
The  bill  is  extravagant.  Then  it  is  $2,500,000  more  than  the  Governor  sub- 
mitted to  this  Legislature,  and  which  he  did  as  a  result  of  a  careful  analysis 
and  after  hearing  all  of  the  heads  of  departments;  that  on  the  question  of 
salaries  alone  this  bill  has  been  increased  over  that  which  the  budget  presented 
by  over  $300,000.  It  has  many  extravagances  in  it.  It  ought  to  be  reduced 
by  a  large  sum,  and  it  is  far  in  excess  of  the  administrative  expenses  of  the 
Glynn  Administration. 

Senator  Sage — Mr.  Chairman,  we  have  heard  the  devil  whipped  around  the 
stump  as  far  as  the  sinking  fund  is  concerned.  I  imagine  we  will  hear  that 
every  year.  Nothing  new  was  said  this  year  and  the  Senator  from  the  16th 
was  kind  enough  not  to  say  so  much  about  it  as  usual. 

Senator  Wagner:  Well,  I  am  talking  to  empty  chairs  and  we  can't  get  much 
enthusiasm.  Let  me  ask  you  one  question  right  there:  Isn't  it  a  fact,  under  the 
present  method  of  contributing  into  our  sinking  fund,  at  the  end  of  twenty-two 
years  the  total  amount  for  amortizing  the  funds  will  l)e  in  those  funds? 

Senator  Sage — I  am  perfectly  willing  to  accept  the  Senator's  figures.  I  know 
he  has  figured  it  up. 

Senator  Wagner — Is  not  that  unjust  to  the  taxpayers,  and  is  not  that  re- 
lieving the  taxpayers  of  the  next  twenty-two  years  who  ought  to  contribute? 

Senator  Sage — I  am  not  arguing  on  the  justice  or  the  injustice  of  the  sinking 
fund,  but  trying  to  say  a  few  words  al)out  the  sinking  fund.  It  comes  up 
again  and  again.  I  know  the  thing  was  wrong;  I  know  an  error  was  made;  I 
know  we  have  more  money  there  than  we  should  liave,  but  that  is  entirely  be- 
side the  question  today,  because  not  being  a  constitutional  lawyer,  I  don't 
know  how  to  get  it  out. 

116 


MINUTES     OF     THE     SENATE     DEBATE 


Now  another  part  of  the  Senator's  speech  was  devoted  to  criticism  of  the 
accounts,  the  appropriations  in  this  bill,  and  I  would  like  to  say  a  few  words 
about  that.     The  principal  criticism  in  the  overhead  charges,  was  it  not? 

Senator  Wagner — It  is  all  through.  There  are  a  lot  of  details,  such  as  your 
printing  appropriation  and  all  that.  It  is  useless  for  me  to  go  into  all  of  that 
now. 

Senator  Sage — But  the  salaries  are  the  thing  that  he  objects  to.  That  is  the 
principal  criticism? 

Senator  Wagner — Xo,  it  is  not. 

Senator  Sage — I  mean  the  amounts. 

Senator  Wagner — Yes. 

Senator  Sage — Now  as  to  the  overhead  charges  in  this  year's  bill  as  com- 
pared with  last  year's  bill — and  I  hope  the  Senator  from  the  16th  will  listen, 
because  he  is  a  fair  man — and  will  take  these  figures  to  heart. 

Senator  Wagner — Have  you  got  the  figures  for  1914  with  you? 

Senator  Sage— No. 

Senator  Wagner — That  is  important.  I  would  like  to  compare  them  with 
the  figures  for  1914. 

Senator  Sage — I  ain  sorry  but  I  cannot  look  those  figures  up  now.  (Turns 
around  and  talks  to  Senator  Wagner,  reading  from  report.  Inaudible  to 
stenographer.) 

Senator  Wagner — That  is  a  law  providing  that  if  a  tramp  is  apprehended 
in  a  county,  the  State  contributes  thirty  cents  a  day?     Is  that  the  law? 

Senator  Sage — I  don't  remember;  but  the  law  has  been  on  the  statute  books 
for  some  years. 

Senator  Wagner — There  is  a  vagrant  law  and  a  tramp  law.  We  are  helping 
you  maintain  the  tramps. 

Senator  Sage — -The  Attorney  General's  increase,  $65,000,  was  in  last  year's 
supply  bill.     This  is  an  overhead  expense. 

Senator  Wagner — Will  he  tell  us  what  the  increase  is?  I  meant  to  call  at- 
tention to  this. 

Senator  Sage — ^During  the  Democratic  Administration  large  sums  were 
appropriated  every  year  for  outside  counsel,  hired  by  the  Attorney  General — 
yes,  there  were  (to  Senator  Wagner).  I  cannot  give  you  the  various  figures 
now,  but  you  will  find  in  last  year's  supply  bill  a  number  of  items;  employed  by 
the  State.  Instead  of  employing  this  outside  counsel  the  Attorney  General's 
counsel  is  attending  to  all  of  it.  The  Attorney  General  today  is  not  employing 
outside  counsel.     He  is  taking  care  of  everything  in  his  own  office. 

Senator  Wagner — The  appropriation  for  the  Attorney  General  is  $103,000 
over  the  Carmody  appropriation. 

Senator  Sage — And  if  you  will  look  up  the  amount  paid  to  outside  counsel 
you  will  find — 

Senator  Wagner— That  it  was  $100,000? 

Senator  Sage — Yes. 

Senator  Wagner — Oh,  no. 

Senator  INIills — Oh,  yes. 

Senator  Wagner — Oh,  no. 

Senator  Mills — Oh,  yes.  I  had  a  very  distinct  recollection  as  to  the  amount 
paid  for  counsel  retained  by  the  State  and  for  that  very  year,  1914,  it  was  over 
$120,000  for  special  counsel  fees,  and  one  other  large  item  paid  a  single  estate — 

Senator  Wagner — The  Attorney  General's  office  has  nothing  to  do  with  that. 

Senator  iNIills — I  understand  that,  but  this  was  special  counsel  retained  by 
the  State. 

Senator  Wagner — The  Senator  is  purposelj'  misleading  this  body  when  he 
talks  about  special  counsel;  special  counsel  employed  by  the  Comptroller  to 
take  charge  of  estates  has  nothing  to  do  with  this.  We  are  not  speaking  about 
this  at  all;  because  there  are  the  same  special  counsel  today. 

Senator  Mills — If  you  will  use  the  same  industry  in  looking  up  the  amounts 
for  special  counsel  in  the  last  three  Democratic  Administrations,  work  that  is 
today  being  done  in  the  Attorney  General's  office,  j'ou  will  find  a  great  saving. 

Senator  Wagner — That  is  absolutely  incorrect. 

Senator  Sage — The  Senator  knows  that  he  is  not. 

Senator  Wagner — I  know  Governor  Sulzer  employed  some  special  counsel. 

117 


APPROPRIATIONS    IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 

Senator  Sage — Yes,  and  Governor  Glynn. 

Senator  Wagner — Not  Governor  Glynn. 

Senator  Sage — Yes;  we  are  paying  .'17, 000  butter  and  egg  investigation,  and 
counsel  is  in  that,  and  we  are  paying  this  year  one  of  the  items  for  the  Hon- 
orable Mr.  Osborne — 

Senator  Wagner:  That  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  Attorney  General's 
office. 

Senator  Sage — Yes,  but  the  Attorney  General  is  now  doing  that  work. 

Senator  Wagner — Not  that  character  of  work. 

Senator  Sage — Yes. 

Senator  Wagner — Well,  I  am  not  going  to  sit  here  and  argue  with  the  Senator. 

Senator  Sage— The  legislative  increase  is  $222,115.  $175,000  of  this  was 
last  year  carried  in  the  supply  bill.  (Reads  further  from  the  sheets  to  Senator 
Wagner.     InaucUble.) 

Governor  Glynn's  administration  was  responsible  for  the  present  organiza- 
tion of  the  Health  Department. 

If  Senator  Wagner  was  at  all  conversant  with  the  Health  Department  in  the 
Glynn  Administration  j^ou  will  find  that  they  have  started  on  a  course  which 
will  cost  the  State  several  million  dollars  a  j'ear,  unless  curbed,  and  we  have 
tried  our  best  to  curb  that. 

The  Industrial  Commission,  etc.  Institutions.  Of  course,  the  Senator 
would  not  want  to  starve  the  inmates. 

Senator  Wagner — Of  course,  there  may  be  extravagance  there  too.  There 
is  an  extraordinary  increase  over  the  last  Gtynn  Administration  of  nine  hundred 
and  some  odd  thousand  dollars. 

Senator  Sage — There  is  one  rather  strange  thing,  $170,000  for  teachers  in 
the  State  of  New  York  and  owing  to  the  fact  that  the  City  of  New  York  was 
not  on  to  its  job  last  year,  was  the  first  year  we  appropriated  to  take  care  of 
the  increase,  because  they  never  knew  thej^  needed  it  and  the  Senator  from  the 
16th  last  j^ear  was  anxious  to  strike  that  out  until  I  explained  to  him  it  was 
going  to  New  York,  and  the  same  thing  was  left  out  of  the  Governor's  budget. 

State  College  and  Normal  School — 

Senator  Wagner — The  State  Athletic  Committee,  a  shght  increase  there? 
I  am  only  taking  a  few  items.  They  all  say  the  increases  are  necessar3\  The 
trouble  is  if  the  majority  body  here  had  permitted  the  minoritj"  committee 
report  which  I  recommended,  we  could  have  an  intelligent  and  scientific  crit- 
icism of  this  budget. 

Senator  Sage — Mr.  President,  if  we  had  that  minority  committee  we  would 
be  adjourning  some  time  along  next  October.  All  I  want  is  for  the  Senator 
from  the  16th  to  be  fair.  It  is  easy  to  say  these  are  not  necessarj'.  If  he 
shows  me  anj'  that  are  not  necessary,  I  wish  he  would  point  it  out. 

Senator  Wagner — How  can  I  tell?  There  are  increases,  the  Attorney  Gen- 
eral is  getting  more  than  Carmody  got  in  his  last  year.  Now,  personally,  I 
cannot  account  for  such  a  tremendous  increase  in  that  department. 

Senator  Sage — If  he  goes  to  the  Attorney  General's  office  he  can. 

Senator  Wagner — Yes,  it  was  enough  to  say  that  we  need  them,  but  I  know 
a  good  many  deputies  appointed  there  at  good  fancy  salaries.  If  I  could  have 
had  opportunity  to  have  an  examination  made,  or  a  committee  to  determine 
whether  or  not  these  increases  were  justified  we  could  have  real  criticism  here. 

Senator  Sage — The  Senator  was  at  perfect  liberty  to  sit  in  with  us  and  we 
would  be  glad  to  have  his  help,  but  if  he  had  done  that  he  could  not  have  been 
the  minority  leader. 

Senator  Wagner — Now,  you  know  how  welcome  I  would  have  been  in  the 
inner  chamber  making  up  appropriations. 

Senator  Sage — We  would  have  been  delighted  and  glad  to  show  him  how  it 
is  worked.     (Laughter.)     I  mean  that. 

Senator  Wagner — If  the  Senator  will  bear  with  me  a  minute,  on  the  $88,000 
increase  on  the  State  Fair,  that  was  put  in  there  after  a  Democratic  Commis- 
sion was  put  out  of  office  and  the  Senator  from  the  38th  got  his  own  commission 
in  and  he  then  insisted  on  the  money  being  put  in  the  supply  bill. 

Senator  Sage — It  has  always  been  carried. 

Senator  Wagner  (reading  from  report) — State  Prison,  increase  $119,000. 

Senator  Sage — Costs  more. 

118 


MINUTES     OF     THE     SENATE     DEBATE 


Senator  Wagner — A  large  increase. 

(Continuing  reading.)  Charitable  institutions,  increased.  Conservation 
Commission,  increased. 

Senator  Sage— This  was  all  and  more,  carried  in  the  Supply  bill  last  year. 

Senator  Wagner — I  would  like,  while  on  the  Department  of  Conservation — 
it  is  pleasant  to  point  out  as  we  go  along — last  year  one  of  the  extravagances 
pointed  out  in  the  Conservation  Department  was  a  counsel  at  .$6,000  a  j^ear 
and  the  bill  itself  provided  for  his  abolition.  I  was  interested  to  notice  this 
year  that  he  comes  back  again  in  the  bill,  and  while  we  abolish  him  in  the 
Conservation  Act,  the  appropriation  bill  has  the  counsel  at  .|6,000.  You  may 
apologize  for  it  and  explain  it,  but  I  wanted  to  call  attention  to  it. 

There  is  the  Department  of  Agriculture — 

(Senator  Wagner,  Senator  Brown  and  Senator  Sage  confer  and  read  from 
the  report.) 

Senator  Sage — Now  there  isn't  any  use  going  through  the  rest  of  this  thing. 

Now  I  don't  think  it  any  use  to  go  into  these  itemized  appropriations  any 
more.  As  far  as  one  criticism  which  has  been  made  here  tonight,  about  the 
total  itemized  appropriations,  is  concerned,  I  think  everyone  realizes  what  we 
have  tried  to  do  this  year,  to  get  as  near  as  possible  to  the  bill  prepared  by  the 
Governor  or  by  the  people  working  for  the  Governor.  The  Senator  from  the 
18th  has  said  that  he  believes  in  giving  the  Governor  or  somebody  else  the 
power  to  shift  within  schedules. 

Does  he  realize  this — and  I  am  not  speaking  of  the  Governor,  any  more 
than  I  am  speaking  of  anybody  else,  Governor  or  Comptroller  or  Chairman  of 
the  Finance  Committee, — that  in  giving  that  power  he  gives  absolute  power 
over  the  entire  personnel  of  the  State  service,  and  is  he  willing  to  give  that 
power  to  anyone?  Not  to  the  Governor,  or  the  Comptroller,  or  the  Chair- 
man of  the  Finance  Committee,  it  should  be  given  to  no  one. 

When  we  appropriate,  and  appropriate  in  the  open  and  get  this  bill  out  here 
in  the  Senate,  as  we  expect  to  do  next  year,  by  March  15th,  so  that  anybody 
can  go  through  all  our  items  and  have  all  the  time  for  study,  and  after  we  do 
that  and  pass  the  bill  and  say  to  the  people,  here  is  the  bill  and  here  is  the 
way  your  money  is  appropriated,  do  you  think  we  should  give  any  one,  the 
Governor,  the  Comptroller,  or  the  Chairman  of  the  Finance  and  Ways  and 
Means  or  anybody  else,  the  power  to  change  items  to  suit  himself?  If  he 
thinks  so,  I  do  not.  And  that  is  the  reason  we  would  not  stand  for  that.  We 
have  changed  the  bill  as  little  as  we  possibly  could.  I  think  there  ought  to 
be  more  leeway  in  all  the  items,  except  the  items  of  personal  service,  and  a  little 
more  leeway  there,  but  I  do  believe  in  the  itemizing  of  personal  service  in  all 
of  the  departments  except  the  Prisons,  Charitable  institutions,  Hospitals  and 
the  Agricultural  schools.  In  these  various  departments  it  is  of  course  impos- 
sible to  get  an  itemized  budget  that  would  be  satisfactory,  and,  to  show  you 
how  impossible  it  is,  the  appropriation  for  the  hospitals  is  $4,000  less  than  they 
could  have  gone  on  with.  It  is  not  that  that  money  is  to  be  spent,  but  they 
have  to  have  that  leeway  and  that  amount  of  money  appropriated  beyond 
the  minimum  needed.  With  charitaljle  institutions  it  is  worse.  Some  of  the 
increases  throughout  this  bill  are  due  to  closely  itemizing  the  bill.  You  cannot 
get  away  from  it.  You  cannot  make  a  bill  like  this,  closely  itemized,  no  larger 
than  a  Sill  where  leeway  is  given.  But  that  does  not  mean  that  the  money  is 
going  to  be  spent  where  it  is  itemized;  they  can  spend  only  for  those  purposes 
and  the  amount  of  surplus  will  go  back  to  the  Treasury.  It  makes  your  appro- 
priation bill  larger,  but  it  does  not  make  your  expenses  larger,  the  fact  that  you 
are  itemizing,  and  I  believe  the  people  who  have  had  experience  will  agree  with 
me,  that  the  fact  you  are  itemizing  is  a  good  thing.  I  don't  care  how  clever  a 
chairman  of  a  finance  committee  was,  the  department  could  fool  him  and  they 
could  conceal  the  man  they  wanted  and  he  could  not  find  out.  Today  each 
position  is  put  down  so  that  all  can  know  and  it  is  the  first  step  towards  stand- 
ardization of  the  State  service.  This  is  the  beginning  of  it.  I  fully  agree 
with  that  part  of  the  bill,  and  I  am  glad  to  see  it  done;  but  if  you  make  a  hard 
and  fast  rule  with  the  Excise  Department,  or  the  Comptroller's  Department 
which  shall  apply  in  the  same  way  to  the  State  Hospitals  or  the  Agricultural 
Schools,  you  are  doing  wrong,  and  I  hope  the  next  time  this  bill  is  drawn  those 
people  will  have  justice  done  them,  which  I  don't  think  is  done  them  this  year. 

119 


APPROPRIATIONS     IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 


Mr.  Chairman,  I  don't  know  of  anything  more  that  I  care  to  say  on  this 

I  do  want  to  say  one  other  thing,  and  that  is  that  I  think  everybody  knows 
there  is  a  good  deal  of  work  connected  with  this  bill.  The  Finance  Committee 
and  the  Ways  and  Means  Committee  have  worked  together,  principally  the 
Chairmen  of  the  two  committees.  They  have  gone  over  this  thing  as  care- 
fully as  they  could,  and  I  want  to  pay  this  compliment  to  the  Chairman  of  the 
Ways  and  iSIeans  Committee  of  the  Assembly,  Mr.  Maier.  I  say  that  he  has 
worked  harder  and  more  continuously  than  I  haA'e  on  this  bill,  and  that  his 
help,  and  in  every  way,  the  way  he  has  treated  this  matter,  the  way  he  has 
stood  up  under  pressure,  and  the  way  he  has  acted  throughout,  stamps  him  as 
one  of  the  most  efficient  men  that  I  know  of  who  have  come  to  this  Legislature 
in  a  good  many  years,  and  I  want  to  say  this  in  this  Senate,  for  he  has  worked 
harder  and  more  loyally  on  this  bill  than  I  have. 

Senator  Brown — Mr.  President,  I  am  very  much  obUged  to  the  Senator 
from  the  18th,  the  Senator  from  the  16th  and  the  Senator  from  the  2Sth  for 
this  discussion.  It  has  given  me  time  to  think  of  one  or  two  things  which  are 
of  some  interest. 

Now,  the  Senator  from  the  16th  announced  that  no  State  tax  was  necessary. 
That  a'direct  State  tax  was  wholly  uncalled  for.  Well,  let  us  see  about  that. 
We  find  that  the  balance  on  June  30th  will  be  $10, 146,000.  Now  if  we  had  not 
put  in  the  nineteen  and  a  half  millions  in  the  direct  State  tax,  there  would  have 
been  a  deficiency  of  nine  and  a  half  millions  on  the  30th  day  of  June,  1916. 
That  is  a  little  lesson  in  arithmetic  that  I  think  is  simple  enough  for  the  stu- 
dents in  the  primary  financial  school  in  New  York  City. 

Senator  Wagner — You  are  assuming  that  we  consider  the  appropriation 
bill  you  passed  a  fair  and  economical  bill.  We  contended  against  many  of 
the  items  in  that  appropriation. 

Senator  Brown — Yes;  in  the  same  way  as  tonight,  striking  against  the  stat- 
utes and  the  constitution.  You  assume  the  constitutional  provision  in  relation 
to  sinking  funds  is  wrong,  or  has  been  wrongly  interpreted  for  twenty  years; 
you  assume  that  the  tax  for  the  Adirondacks  is  wrong  and  therefore  there 
ought  not  to  be  any  appropriation  to  discharge  the  State's  obhgation,  and  you 
assume  that  the  bill  repealing  the  provision  for  county  roads  aid  will  be  re- 
pealed and  therefore  it  was  the  duty  of  the  Finance  Committee,  before  it 
became  a  law,  to  omit  the  items.     I  call  that  sub-primary. 

Senator  Wagner — Don't  you  assume  it  is  to  be  repealed? 

Senator  Brown — Yes;  but  until  it  is  repealed  it  is  the  duty  of  the  Finance 
Committee  to  comply  with  the  statutes  of  the  State. 

I  do  not  propose  to  be  diverted  from  this  little  story.  I  will  be  interrupted, 
but  I  will  not  lose  the  main  thought.  There  is  nine  and  a  half  millions  in  the 
hole,  if  we  had  not  levied  the  direct  state  tax.  Well,  then  we  need  a  working 
surplus  of  five  millions.  The  State  ought  always  to  have  that.  There  is 
fourteen  and  a  half  millions.  Then,  if  the  State  had  not  approved  the  twenty- 
seven  million  dollar  referendum  there  would  have  been  $3,600,000  dropped 
out  there.     There  is  $18,100,000— a  pretty  story,  isn't  it? 

Senator  Wagner — The  way  you  tell  it. 

Senator  Brown — A  very  pretty  story — and  there  is  not  any  getting  away 
from  it. 

Senator  Wagner — Oh,  yes. 

Senator  Brown — Oh,  no.  No  escape  at  all.  You  have  taught  me  a  number 
of  things  but  not  in  finance  tonight  except  to  be  careful  not  to  make  such 
statements  as  you  have  made. 

Senator  Wagner — It  is  impossible. 

Senator  Brown — I  will  be  very  careful  about  that. 

So  we  have  eighteen  millions.  We  would  have  been  wrong  if  we  had  levied 
the  tax  of  191.5.  That  is  all.  You  set  them  down,  and  my  friend  from  the 
15th  (referring  to  Senator  Boylan)  will  help  you  add  them  up.     That  will  be 

all  right. 

Senator  Wagner— We  will  not  ask  you  to  help,  because  I  would  not  be 

accurate. 

Senator  Brown — Yes,  I  understand  about  that. 

120 


MINUTES     OF     THE     SENATE     DEBATE 


Now,  Mr.  President,  it  is  a  very  different  situation  from  a  year  ago.  Ten 
naillions  in  the  Treasury  and  the  money  is  there  and  is  going  to  be  ajiphed  to 
the  expenses  of  the  State.  In  June,  1915,  the  Comptroller  of  the  State  was 
scurrying  around  in  the  purlieus  of  Wall  Street  to  see  if  he  could  not  borrow 
enough  money  to  pay  the  schoolmarms.  They  had  to  go  without  pajf  and 
vacation  until  he  could  raise  the  wind  on  the  strength  of  the  Democratic  budget 
of  the  year  before.     That  is  interesting. 

Senator  Wagner — Does  he  know  that  the  Comptroller  should  have  taken 
that  money  from  the  sinking  fund,  as  previous  administrations,  including  that 
of  Governor  Hughes  and  that  of  Governor  Higgins,  had  done,  and  saved  this 
interest  on  the  money  which  he  could  have  done? 

Senator  Brown — I  deny  that  Governor  Higgins  ever  took  a  dollar  out  of  the 
sinking  fund.  I  know  that  ever  since  the  Democrats  came  into  power,  since 
1911,  they  have  had  a  terrible  itching  to  get  at  the  sinking  funds.  The  pres- 
ence of  ten  or  eleven  millions  that  they  could  not  get  their  hands  on  has  driven 
them  almost  to  distraction  and  they  could  not  quiet  the  itching,  they  could 
find  no  lotion  with  which  to  do  that,  and  they  had  the  most  awful  time  I  ever 
knew  any  party  of  men  to  have;  but  by  one  means  or  another,  through  the 
stand  of  Attorney  General  Carmody  and  the  Comptroller's  office  of  the  Demo- 
cratic party  we  were  able  to  hang  on  by  the  gills  until  the  time  passed  that 
you  occupied  office  and  the  sinking  funds  were  there  yet  undisposed  of  and 
undistributed,  and  we  have  not  been  very  uncomfortable  since  we  came  in 
because  we  could  not  sow  it  to  the  winds. 

Now  the  sinking  fund  proposition  is  a  very  peculiar  one.  We  have  an 
amendment  in  this  year  to  provide  that  hereafter  the  life  of  l)onds  shall  not 
exceed  the  probable  life  of  the  improvement.  It  is  a  fact  the  bonds  for  the 
highways  will  exceed  very  much  the  life  of  the  improvements.  To-wit,  the 
life  of  the  improvement  is  ten  years  and  the  bond  is  fifty  years — just  five  times 
the  life  of  the  improvement — and  my  friend  is  very  much  distressed  because 
those  bonds  are  going  to  have  money  enough  in  the  sinking  fund  to  pay  for 
them  in  thirty  years. 

Senator  Wagner — Twenty  years. 

Senator  Browm — Thirty — arithmetic  comes  in  again.     Thirty  years. 

Senator  W^agner — Look  at  your  Comptroller's  report. 

Senator  Brown — I  don't  mind  a  little  difference  of  ten  years.  You  were 
more  than  a  thousand  years  away.     (Laughter.) 

Now,  Mr.  President,  we  have  reviewed  very  briefl}'  what  our  happy  con- 
dition would  have  been  if  your  policy  had  been  pursued,  the  Senator  from  the 
16th,  in  1915.  We  would  have  been  almost  as  happy  as  we  were  last  year  in 
June  and  as  we  were  on  the  30th  day  of  September,  when  if  it  had  not  been  for 
the  six  millions  that  the  Comptroller  borrowed  down  in  New  York  City,  we 
would  not  have  had  money  enough  to  pay  the  men  that  sweep  out  the  office — 
that  would  have  been  a  very  comfortable  time  indeed  and  my  friend  from  the 
18th,  over  there,  I  have  never  been  quite  sure  where  he  stood.  I  think  that 
he  runs  with  the  hounds  and  the  hare  both,  a  little.  Now  he  is  much  in  favor 
of  introducing  into  State  affairs  the  excellent  financial  methods  of  the  City  of 
New  York.  When  we  are  not  discussing  State  affairs,  nothing  is  worse  than 
the  financial  situation  of  the  City  of  New  York;  but  when  we  are  discussing 
State  affairs  he  would  transfer  and  transpose  the  New  York  method  into  our 
affairs.  Well,  they  do  pretty  well  down  there,  they  are  never  behind  the 
lighthouse  more  than  a  hundred  and  ten  or  a  hundred  and  fifteen  millions  for 
short-term  paper  in  anticipation  of  taxes,  at  a  clip,  and  they  never  catch  up. 
There  is  always  a  deficit. 

Senator  Bennett — Will  the  gentleman  yield? 

Senator  Brown — W^ith  pleasure. 

Senator  Bennett — (Remarks  to  Senator  Brown,  inaudible  at  the  stenogra- 
pher's desk.) 

Senator  Brown — Why  lug  the  New  York  City  methods  into  the  State?  We 
have  simpler  ideas.  We  are  a  settled,  country  folk,  and  we  do  not  understand 
how  you  conduct  those  matters  successfully. 

Senator  Bennett — (Again  remarks  inaudibly  to  Senator  Brown.) 

Senator  Brown — Well,  you  wanted  power  to  transfer  the  money  from  a 
different  purpose  from  what  it  was  appropriated  for;  you  wanted  to  bring  that 

121 


APPROPRIATIONS    IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 

up  here,  and  my  friend  wanted  to  take  the  money  out  of  the  sinking  fund. 
Now,  he  got  that  from  New  York:  They  have  between  eighty  and  ninety 
millions  in  the  sinking  fund  in  New  York,  on  paper,  and  not  a  dollar  in  money. 
Nothing  there  but  paper,  printed  by  a  machine,  and  in  computing  the  debts 
of  the  City  of  New  York  they  very  conveniently  take  the  suvn  total  of  their 
indebtedness,  the  amount  of  their  paper,  in  the  sinking  fund,  and  that  is  all 
there  is  to  the  sinking  fund. 

Now  for  my  part,  I  prefer  the  rural  method  of  finance.  It  strikes  me  on  the 
whole  as  a  little  safer. 

Well,  there  is  another  thing  about  it.  I  showed  you  that  we  could  not  have 
lived  and  been  provided  for  at  all  if  it  had  not  been  for  the  referendum.  That 
is  a  pretty  fair  justification  for  the  eighteen  million  dollar  direct  tax. 

We  were  lucky  in  our  receipts  and  economical  in  expenditure  and  these  two 
forces  together  gave  us  one  and  a  half  million  more  than  we  expected  to  have. 
That  is  not  an  unhappy  result.  Not  too  bad,  in  the  course  of  the  year.  Now, 
last  Spring,  after  you  had  been  running  the  government  for  four  years,  we  had 
to  put  on  a  tax  of  nineteen  million  dollars  on  the  State  and  you  had  to  pay 
approximately  thirteen  millions  in  New  York.  Now  this  year  you  have  not 
got  to  pay  anj-thing.  You  are  just  one  million  three  hundred  and  sixty  thou- 
sand dollars  better  off  on  our  financing  than  j'ou  were  on  yours,  on  the  direct 
tax.  Now,  really,  couldn't  you  bring  us  one  of  the  earliest  wildflowers  for 
that,  in  the  morning?  I  think  you  will  find  a  few  in  blossom  in  the  woods. 
Just  bring  us  a  little  decoration  for  that.  It  is  worth  while  mentioning.  You 
did  not  say  anything  about  it,  but  really  and  truly  it  is  not  too  bad,  and  be- 
sides, we  have  done  a  few  other  things  for  you.  We  agreed  today  to  amend 
the  Excise  tax  and  you  will  get  a  million  or  two  out  of  that.  We  have  taken 
the  whole  of  it  this  year  for  the  State,  for  the  reason  that  if  we  did  not  we 
would  have  to  levy  a  direct  State  tax  and  we  thought  that  New  York  City 
would  rather  devote  her  share  of  the  excise  tax,  of  which  she  only  pays  sixty- 
two  per  cent,  to  the  wiping  out  of  the  indebtedness  this  year,  than  to  pay  sixty- 
eight  per  cent  by  direct  tax.  I  hope  we  will  not  be  too  severely  scolded  for 
that.  At  any  rate,  the  statute  is  going  on  the  books  and  you  are  to  have  your 
million  dollars  annually  after  this  year. 

Then  we  have,  after  trying  for  three  or  four  months  to  find  out  in  vain  what 
you  pay  for  your  Public  Service  Commission  in  the  City  of  New  York,  we  have 
provided  by  law  that  that  expense  shall  be  borne  bj^  the  State  after  this  year. 
We  would  have  given  it  to  you  this  year  if  you  cared  a  snap  about  six  hundred 
thousand  dollars.  Why,  six  hundred  thou.sand  dollars  in  a  $212,000,000 
budget — you  cannot  make  a  man  drop  an  eyelid  from  the  City  of  New  York 
on  six  hundred  thousand  dollars.  Nobody  will  get  up  at  eight  o'clock  instead 
of  nine  o'clock  in  the  morning  to  make  out  a  list  so  that  we  can  put  it  in  our 
budget  by  itself.  The  mere  fact  that  we  are  approaching  bankruptcy  is 
nothing;  we  are  rich;  and  a  mere  six  hundred  thousand  dollars — that  is  to 
laugh.     (Laughter.) 

That  is  the  reason  you  have  got  it,  because  there  was  nobody  in  New  York 
public-spirited  enough  to  get  around  and  bring  the  list  up  here. 

Then  we  were  going  to  give  \^ou  four  hundred  thousand  dollars  of  the  Auto- 
mobile tax. 

Senator  Wagner — When?     Next  week? 

Senator  Brown — No,  right  away,  on  the  first  collection.  Well,  we  are,  you 
ought  to  have  found  that  out.  New  York  is  entitled  to  it  and  she  is  going  to 
have  it. 

And  we  have  repealed,  or  will  have  repealed  this  year,  the  provision  for  aid 
to  counties  adjoining  cities  of  the  first-class,  and  the  provision  permitting 
construction  of  roads  in  cities  of  the  second  and  third-class  up-State,  and  out 
of  those  two  sources,  you  will  save  another  million — that  is  three  millions. 
While  you  are  not  going  to  get  it  all  this  year,  you  will  get  it  next  year,  you 
will  have  that  three  millions,  and  it  will  be  a  permanent  source  of  income  and 
it  will  be  about  like  a  peach  to  a  six-j'ear-old  })oy,  and  at  the  same  time  we  are 
going  to  hang  around  and  double  it  for  you  somewhere. 

Senator  Wagner — Next  week? 

Senator  Brown — No,  that  will  l)e  the  year  after.  We  cannot  come  too  fast 
on  that.     But  we  are  going  to  try  to  improve  your  methods  of  finance  down 

122 


MINUTES     OF     THE     SENATE     DEBATE 


there.  We  passed  bills  in  the  Senate,  Vv-hich,  if  you  won't  oppose  them  too 
vigorously  in  the  Assembly,  will  be  worth  three  times  that  annually  to  you  in 
New  York. 

I  know  your  argument:  We  have  lived  in  debt  so  much  that  we  have  got 
to  live  as  a  bankrupt  hereafter.  But  the  State  is  not  going  to  stand  for  that; 
it  is  going  to  put  you  on  your  feet  again — (replying  to  some  inaudible  remarks 
of  Senator  Wagner)  if  you  only  did — I  apologize  for  what  I  said — I  am  glad 
to  know  that  you  and  I  agree  on  it. 

The  truth  is  that  you  and  I  agree  on  the  inside  so  much  better  than  we  do 
on  the  outside. 

Senator  Wagner — That  is  the  truest  thing  you  ever  said. 

Senator  Brown — If  the  people  only  knew  how  nearly  you  agree  with  me  in 
what  I  say,  they  would  laugh  at  all  this  time  spent  in  discussion  of  the  subject. 
(Laughter.) 

(Interruption  by  the  gavel.) 

Well,  I  apologize,  Mr.  President,  for  taking  up  the  time  of  the  Senate.  It 
is  another  lesson  in  New  York  City  Financial  Primary  School,  First  Grade. 

Senator  Wagner — I  can  see  how  fond  the  Senator  from  the  35th  is  of  New 
York.  Of  course  he  is  witty  and  amusing,  but  to  one  who  has  actual  knowl- 
edge of  the  facts  when  he  talks  he  tries  the  patience  tremendously.  He  uses 
figures  like  a  child  uses  a  rubber  ball  to  play  with,  just  to  suit  his  own  purpose. 

Now,  he  began  by  saying  the  Democratic  Administration  was  looking  around 
for  money  and  they  saw  this  excess  in  the  sinking  fund  and  their  mouth  was 
watering,  and  they  could  not  get  at  it  quick  enough — what  is  the  fact  about 
the  Democratic  Administration  as  compared  with  the  expenditures  under  the 
Republican  Administration?  Why,  in  two  years  you  have  increased  your 
expenditures,  your  expenditures  for  government  by  seven  millions;  and  see 
the  extravagant  expenditure  of  the  public  funds. 

Senator  Brown — Mr.  President,  will  my  amiable  friend  permit  a  question? 

Senator  Wagner — Yes,  if  it  is  not  witty — just  a  single  question.  Don't 
try  to  make  people  laugh,  get  down  to  the  facts. 

Senator  Brown — I  am  serious  about  it. 

Senator  Wagner — I  refuse  to  yield. 

Now,  Mr.  President,  the  Senator  from  the  28th,  in  discussing  the  appropria- 
tion a  moment  ago  admitted  that  the  appropriation  for  the  ordinary  expenses 
of  government  was  three  million  dollars  for  the  expenses  last  year,  so  that  in 
your  own  administration,  from  the  mouth  of  your  own  Chairman  of  Finance 
Committee,  you  conceded  to  an  increase  of  three  millions  in  the  ordinary 
expenses  of  government.  Now  don't  talk  about  who  is  after  the  millions,  and 
who  wants  to  spend  the  public  money.  My  estimate  is  about  a  million  more 
than  that  of  the  Senator  from  the  2Sth.  Now,  who  is  after  this  money?  I 
mean  Senator  Sage,  in  his  defense  of  the  appropriation  bill,  he  admitted  an 
increase  over  last  year,  during  your  own  administration,  of  over  three  million 
dollars  merely  in  the  administration  of  the  department.  Now,  don't  talk 
about  extravagance  and  make  these  witty  speeches  about  the  Democrats 
seeking  to  get  money  wherever  it  may  be  loose.  I  know  it  is  witty  and  it 
sounds  good,  but  it  is  untrue.  The  first  year  of  the  Dix  Administration,  for 
the  expenditure  of  the  administrative  department,  it  was  less  than  the  last 
year  of  the  Hughes  Administration ;  and  in  a  year  and  a  half  you  are  proposing 
to  increase  the  expenditure  of  government  by  seven  million  dollars.  Now,  I 
am  serious  about  it,  because  I  know  what  I  say  is  true.  I  am  not  going  to  use 
figures  like  a  magician  and  try  to  amuse  the  galleries,  I  am  going  to  speak 
facts.  Now  we  did  say  there  wasn't  a  direct  tax  needed  last  year,  and  there 
wasn't.  If  your  appropriation  bill  of  last  year  had  been  reduced  to  the  sum 
necessary  to  administer  government,  you  would  not  have  needed  nineteen 
millions,  and  the  appropriation  bill  of  this  year  justifies  the  assertion  which  we 
made  then. 

Now  the  Senator  says  that  this  absurd  proposition  of  taking  money  out  of 
the  sinking  fund,  so  far  as  sinking  funds  No.  2  and  No.  3  are  concerned,  why, 
you  are  doing  it  here.  You  are  appropriating  interest  out  of  the  sinking  fund 
No.  3,  although  you  are  making  no  appropriation  into  that  sinking  fund,  and 
you  are  recognizing  in  that  a  transfer  for  which  I  am  contending  with  reference 
to  the  other  sinking  funds,  and  the  Senator  says  he  does  not  know  the  con- 

9  123 


APPROPRIATIONS     IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 

stitution,  and  the  gallery  laughs  again.  Of  course,  no  one  can  make  that 
assertion,  but  here  is  the  constitutional  provision.  Section  5,  Article  7,  "The 
sinking  funds  provided  for  the  payment  of  interest  and  the  extinguishment  of 
the  principal  of  the  debts  of  the  State  shall  be  separately  kept  and  safely  in- 
vested, and  neither  of  them  shall  be  appropriated  or  used  in  any  manner  other 
than  for  the  specific  purpose  for  which  it  shall  have  been  provided" — namely, 
principal  and  interest.  Now  all  I  am  contending,  is  that  the  monej's  in  that 
sinking  fund,  put  by  mistake,  as  everyone  admits,  shall  be  used  for  the  pay- 
ment of  interest  and  the  extinguishment  of  the  principal  of  the  debt.  Is  that 
diverting  the  sinking  funds?  "Purpose  for  which  it  was  created,"  and  the 
Senator  fails  to  say  that  in  the  appropriation  bill  itself  there  is  no  appropria- 
tion made  for  sinking  funds  No.  2  and  Xo.  3,  thereby  recognizing  the  very 
principle  for  which  I  am  contending,  that  a  surplus  or  excess  can  be  used  as  it 
is  being  used  this  year,  for  the  payment  of  both  principal  and  interest,  and  if 
you  will  use  that— 

Senator  Brown — Will  the  Senator  permit  an  interruption? 

Senator  Wagner — Yes. 

Senator  Brown — If  it  is  demonstrated  upon  the  return  of  the  Senator  from 
the  28th  that  appropriations  are  not  made  as  required  by  the  referendum  next 
year,  by  the  necessities  of  the  debts,  in  the  appropriation  bill,  under  the  Con- 
stitution, I  will  not  vote  for  the  bill. 

Senator  Wagner — Now,  I  wiU  show  you  what  the  difference  is  between  the 
two. 

Senator  Brown — Well,  I  doubt  that. 

Senator  Wagner — Well,  I  will  show  you  the  difference  between  sinking  fund 
No.  3  and  4  is  this:  In  the  statute  authorizing  bonds  for  fund  No.  4,  there 
was  a  provision  that  a  certain  fixed  rate  shall  be  levied  each  year  upon  the 
assessed  value  of  the  real  estate  in  this  State,  and  the  same  shall  be  paid  into 
the  sinking  fund,  this  year,  unchanged.  Now,  the  only  provision  in  the  Con- 
stitution, so  far  as  sinking  funds  are  concerned,  is  that  a  sum  shall  be  paid 
there  each  year  which  at  maturity  would  amortize  the  bonds  and  a  sum  to  pay 
the  interest  of  the  bonds  for  which  the  sinking  fund  was  created.  Now  the 
Senator  may  contend  that  the  specific  rate  fixed  in  the  law  was  a  contract  with 
the  bondholder.  He  himself  cannot  contend  that,  because  last  year  at  the 
polls  they  defeated  a  proposal  which  he  offered,  amending  the  Constitution 
80  as  to  permit  using  the  excess  in  the  sinking  fund  for  interest. 

Senator  BrowTi — Mr.  President,  that  was  carried  down  by  the  Woman's 
Suffrage  Amendment,  and  my  friend's  constitution.  The  two  together  were 
too  much  for  it. 

Senator  Wagner — No,  I  was  against  the  Constitution,  just  as  you  were. 

Senator  Brown — It  was  unfortunate. 

Senator  Wagner — Why  was  it  necessary  to  amend  the  State  Constitution? 
If  you  contend  that  there  is  a  contract  there,  the  amendment  of  our  State 
Constitution  could  not  impair  the  obligation  in  that  contract,  for  your  Federal 
Constitution  and  the  due  process  of  law  clause  there  would  prevent,  even  by 
amending  a  State  Constitution,  the  impairment  of  any  contract  obhgation. 
But  there  is  nothing  to  the  contention  that  that  is  a  contract,  for  suppose  the 
sum  specified  by  law  was  not  sufficient  if  contributed  every  year  to  amortize 
the  bond  at  maturity?  You  would  at  once  say  we  have  got  to  raise  an  addi- 
tional sum  in  order  to  have  an  additional  sum  at  the  maturity  of  the  bonds, 
to  amortize  it,  so  you  see  there  is  nothing  in  that  contention  so  far  as  a  contract 
is  concerned. 

Now,  on  borrowing  money,  let  me  assure  the  Senator  from  the  35th  again, 
that  if  he  will  take  the  trouble  to  investigate  the  Comptroller's  office,  he  will 
find  in  all  different  administrations  at  times  money  had  to  be  borrowed,  because 
you  know  indirect  revenues  do  not  come  in  so  much  per  month  or  so  much  per 
week,  there  are  months  when  there  are  practically  no  indirect  revenues  coming 
in  and  there  are  months  in  which  they  pile  in  and  in  the  interim  it  is  necessary  to 
borrow  money,  and  always  in  the  past  the  Comptrollers  have  borrowed  that 
money  from  the  sinking  fund  money  lying  in  the  banks,  and  last  year  we  went 
to  Wall  Street  and  borrowed  six  millions  and  paid  four  per  cent,  and  our  own 
money  was  lying  in  the  banks  and  the  State  was  only  receiving  two  per  cent 
from  those  banks.     Now,  would  it  not  be  just  as  well  to  have  the  State  borrow 

124 


MINUTES     OF     THE     SENATE     DEBATE 


the  money  as  to  have  the  banks  borrow  it  for  us  and  then  we  go  out  and  borrow 
six  millions  and  give  the  banks  four  per  cent?  Is  not  that  peculiar  financing? 
And  that  is  the  first  time  we  went  down  to  Wall  Street  to  borrow  this  money 
instead  of  going  among  our  banks  holding  the  sinking  fund  money  and  using 
it  in  their  everj'da}'  transactions,  and  giving  two  per  cent  interest  and  they  get 
five  or  six  per  cent,  including  the  discount  which  they  enjoy.  Those  are  the 
real  facts.  I  cannot  be  funny,  I  won't  try  to  be  funny  on  a  serious  subject, 
but  I  have  the  facts  and  the  records  to  carry  out  my  contention. 

Senator  Brown — Mr.  President,  I  don't  accept  the  generalities  of  my  friend, 
and  if  there  were  not  any  specifics  in  it  I  don't  suppose  I  ought  to  detain  the 
House  any  further.  The  charge  that  this  administration  unnecessarily  left 
money  in  banks  and  borrowed  money  at  a  high  rate  of  interest,  cannot  be 
justified  at  all.  There  is  no  foundation  for  it  whatever.  It  is  perfectly  well 
known  that  money  in  the  sinking  funds  is  not  available  to  pay  appropriations. 
That  is  enough.  I  need  not  say  any  more.  If  it  were  available  to  pay  appro- 
priations, we  would  soon  be  in  the  condition  of  my  friend's  home.  We  would 
not  have  any  money  in  the  sinking  fund  at  all.  We  might  just  as  well  pass 
a  statute  tomorrow,  abolishing  the  sinking  fund,  as  far  as  the  City  of  New  York 
is  concerned.  In  fact,  you  would  save  thousands  of  transactions  and  the 
security  would  not  be  decreased.     I  don't  accept  the  doctrine. 

Now  the  Senator  said  I  talked  to  amuse  the  gallery.  I  talked  to  entertain 
him,  and  I  see  from  his  remarks  that  I  did. 

Now,  Mr.  President,  I  am  perfectly  willing,  in  view  of  the  profound  interest 
of  all  the  members  of  the  Senate  in  this  discussion,  to  continue  it  tomorrow. 
It  was  my  intention — I  called  it  up  for  discussion  last  night,  and  nobody  was 
ready  to  discuss  it.  We  are  here  to  discuss  it  now.  If  anybody  desires  to 
continue  the  discussion  tomorrow,  it  will  be  held  over  and  not  passed  until 
tomorrow.  One  single  man  will  save  the  City  from  destruction.  Is  there 
such  a  senator? 

Senator  Bennett — I  suggest  that  it  go  over  until  tomorrow. 

Senator  Brown — I  will  agree  to  that  if  the  Senator  from  the  18th  won't 
bring  in  any  more  of  those  New  York  theories  to  apply  to  the  New  York  State 
finances. 

Senator  Bennett — Didn't  I  convert  you  to  my  theory  last  year?  You  went 
down  there  and  found  out  — 

Senator  Brown — Yes,  you  did,  you  did,  Mr.  President,  but  it  may  lie  over 
and  nolijy  the  Senators  who  are  sleeinng  that  it  will  lie  over. 


125 


APPROPRIATIONS     IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 


IN  THE  SENATE 

Albany,  N.  Y.,  ApnZ  19,  1916,  11:20  A.M. 
Discussion  on  Appropriation  Bill 

Senator  Brown — Mr.  President,  I  ask  that  we  take  up  the  Appropriation 
Bill. 

President  Schoeneck — The  Clerk  will  read. 

The  Clerk— Third  reading.  No.  1001— Assembly  Bill  2071.  By  Mr.  Maier, 
An  Act  making  appropriation  for  the  support  of  government. 

Senator  Bennett — Mr.  President,  I  would  like  to  say  a  word  in  regard  to  this 
bill. 

Of  course  I  realize  that  we  have  got  to  make  appropriation  for  the  support 
of  government,  and  I  expect  to  vote  for  the  Bill;  and  I  realize  that  the  makeup 
of  this  Bill  is  a  tremendous  job,  requiring  practically  constant  work  on  the 
part  of  the  Chairmen  of  the  two  committees;  nevertheless  it  strikes  me  that 
there  are  several  items  which  might  have  been  pruned,  and  the  first  item  that 
attracts  my  attention  is  the  appropriation  for  the  Department  of  Forestry  at 
Syracuse.  I  believe  this  Bill  is  on  the  calendar  in  the  order  of  third  reading 
today,  on  which  is  the  watchful  eye  of  the  Senator  from  the  3Sth.  Now, 
the  State  Conservation  Commission — • 

Senator  Walters — Will  the  Senator  yield?  You  say  that  that  appropria- 
tion should  have  been  pruned  more  than  it  has  been  pruned? 

Senator  Bennett — It  should  have  been  whittled. 

Senator  Walters — Does  the  Senator  know  what  he  is  talking  about? 

Senator  Bennett — I  will  leave  the  Senator  from  the  38th  to  decide  that  for 
himself. 

Mr.  Chairman  and  Members  of  the  Senate,  the  State  Conservation  Commis- 
sion has  under  its  administrative  charge  a  million  and  a  half  acres  of  land, 
nurseries,  for  the  production  of  ten  million  trees  per  year,  and  general  forest 
fire  protection.     There  is  also  a  school  of  forestry  at  Cornell,  and  at  Syracuse. 

The  State  Superintendent  of  Forests,  under  the  Conservation  Commission, 
with  all  this  great  reserve  under  its  care,  draws  a  salary  of  $4,000.  The  Professor 
at  the  head  of  the  forestry  course  at  Cornell  draws  a  salary  of  $3,750,  while  the 
Dean  of  the  school  at  Syracuse  draws  a  salary  of  five  thousand  dollars.  If  you 
compare  the  importance  of  the  three  positions,  I  think  you  will  see  readily  that 
the  position  of  the  head  of  the  course  of  forestry  at  Cornell  is  a  more  important 
position  than  the  positions  to  which  the  additional  salary  is  being  paid.  The 
Cornell  Faculty  having  to  do  with  Forestry,  with  the  exception  of  the  Director, 
receive  more  salary — (inaudible) :  at  Syracuse  the  administrative  staff  receives 
$8,564.  The  professors  (inaudible)  for  maintenance  and  operation — (in- 
audible). 

Senator  Sage — Mr.  President,  will  the  Senator  give  way? 

Senator  Bennett — No,  I  won't  give  way. 

Now,  when  we  come — we  have  in  this  Bill  before  us  a  segregated  budget, 
which  is  segregated  to  a  much  greater  extent  than  the  budget  of  the  Governor, 
nevertheless  we  find  among  the  appropriations  for  the  Attorney-General, 
additional  deputies,  §20,000  (?),  without  specifying  either  the  number  of 
deputies  or  salaries.  We  find  that  in  addition  to  the  large  amount  appropriated 
for  the  Attorney-General,  and  without  specification,  the  Excise  Bureau,  S67,- 
000;  Department  of  Health,  iS4,000;  State  Industrial  Commission,  legal  bureau, 
$3,200;  State  Tax  Department,  $7,800;  Educational  Department,  $8,400— 
these  amounts  being  for  the  legal  division  staffs. 

I  am  inclined  to  think  that  the  State  business  does  not  require  all  that  tre- 
mendous expenditure  for  the  service  of  lawyers.  I  will  admit  that  the  legal 
profession  is  overcrowded,  and  some  of  us  do  need  probably — perhaps  a  part 
of  them  must  get  a  living  on  the  State. 

Here  is  one  item  that  I  call  especial  attention  to :  The  Banking  Department 
has  a  provision  for  salary  expenses,  of  $157,000, — without  any  hmit. 

Senator  Brown — What  department? 

Senator  Bennett — The  Department  of  Banking. 

Senator  Brown — Will  the  Senator  permit  an  interruption?  About  that, 
just  a  second.     It  is  never  known  what  the  compensation  of  any  particular 

126 


MINUTES     OF     THE     SENATE     DEBATE 


examiner  in  the  Banking  Department  will  be,  for  the  reason  that  it  is  based  on 
services  rendered,  and  therefore  it  is  impossible  to  itemize  it. 

Senator  Bennett — I  would  also  call  attention  to  the  fact  that  some  of  the 
items  which  are  appropriated  for  the  schools  and  hospitals  (inaudible)  and 
Letchworth  Village,  we  provide  them  a  (inaudible)  at  $1,000,  and  here  is  a 
laundry,  at  832,000,  another  laundry  on  Long  Island,  $35,000;  another  store- 
house on  Long  Island,  $60,000 — if  you  go  down  the  list,  you  will  find  they  are 
all  entirelj'  out  of  proportion  in  that  class,  to  make  it  not  only  comfortable, 
but  luxurious.  And  the  last  item  is  the  well-advertised  Panama  Commission. 
I  know  that  that  Commission  has  finished  its  business,  and  was  on  the  way  from 
San  Francisco  by  freight  and  was  held  up  on  account  of  congestion  in  the  freight 
terminals  caused  by  the  European  war,  but  we  find  in  this  appropriation  bill  a 
reappropriation  for  the  Panama,  a  reappropriation  of  $47,606. 

It  is  useless  prolonging  the  enumeration  of  these  items.  I  think  the  mere 
naming  of  them  shows  they  are  excessive,  but  I  would  like  to  reiterate  the 
point,  that  the  State  is  not  meeting  the  issue  before  it  squarely.  It  was  ad- 
mitted in  the  debate  yesterday  that  we  are  appi'opriating  at  least  ten  million 
dollars  in  excess  of  revenues — that  was  admitted  by  the  Senator  from  the 
Twenty-eighth — and  in  my  opinion  we  are  going  to  appropriate  twenty  mil- 
lions in  excess,  but  we  will  let  it  go  at  ten  millions.  Last  night  the  Senator 
from  the  Thirty-fifth  said  the  working  balance  should  be  five  million,  and  if  we 
appropriate  only  ten  millions  more,  we  arrived  yesterday  at  the  conclusion 
that  at  the  end  of  the  next  fiscal  year  we  would  reduce  our  bank  balance  at  the 
end  of  the  year  to  a  million  and  a  half;  and  if  the  bill  goes  through  to  pay  to  the 
localities,  one-half  the  motor  vehicle  tax,  it  may  not  amount  to  enough  to  wipe 
out  that  balance,  and  at  the  end  of  the  next  fiscal  year  the  treasury  will  be 
absolutely  empty.  If  the  program  goes  through  for  New  York  City,  it  will 
not  only  be  empty,  but  we  will  have  a  deficit  which  we  had  to  make  up  last 
year  by  a  direct  tax. 

Now,  Senator  from  the  Twenty-eighth,  I  called  attention  of  the  Senate  to  the 
fact  that  the  reappropriation  part  of  this  bill,  namely.  Part  6,  was  not  footed  up 
in  the  summary,  in  the  big  sheet.  First,  I  think  the  Senator  from  the  28th 
said  that  did  not  amount  to  much,  but  if  you  take  out  from  Part  6  the  amount 
appropriated  out  of  Canal  Fund,  and  Highway  Fund,  you  will  find  the  amounts 
which  are  appropriated  from  the  general  fund  amount  to  $87,300,  and  if  you  add 
that  to  the  deficit,  you  have  a  good  deal  bigger  deficit.  Now  the  gentleman 
from  the  Twenty-eighth,  after  that,  said  that  these  amounts  were  taken  care 
of  in  some  other  way. 

Senator  Sage — The  explanation  is  that  the  Comptroller  in  m.aking  his  esti- 
mate reserved  money  necessary  to  take  care  of  these  appropriations,  and  so  they 
do  not  appear  in  the  estimated  amounts  at  the  end. 

Senator  Bennett — Is  that  included  in  this  reserve  of  two  millions? 

Senator  Sage — Yes,  it  is  included  in  that  two  millions. 

Senator  Bennett — Does  this  interest  payment — was  this  interest  payment 
from  September  1,  1916,  or  1,  2  and  3  of  the  highway? 

Senator  Sage — (Answers  Senator  Bennett,  but  inaudible  to  the  Stenographer.) 

Senator  Wagner — They  use  the  excess  in  the  sinking  fund  for  the  purpose 
of  paying  interest;  they  are  actually  doing  it,  for  they  are  appropriating  it  out 
of  the  sinking  fund,  and  no  mention  is  made  of  No.  2  or  No.  3. 

Senator  Bennett — Now  yesterday,  after  going  over  all  the  figures,  there  was 
absolute  unanimity  on  the  point  that  v^e  are  appropriating  ten  millions  more 
than  our  revenue. 

Senator  Sage — We  are?  I  would  like  to  say — I  ask  the  Chair  that  Mr. 
Reusswig  be  allowed  to  answer  any  questions  the  Senator  from  the  Sixteenth 
may  ask. 

President  Schoeneck — That  privilege  will  be  extended. 

Senator  Bennett — Mr.  Reusswig,  if  you  will  turn  to  the  last  page  of  this 
prefix,  you  will  find  there  a  cash  balance  of  $12,146,000:  will  that  be  the  actual 
cash  balance  on  June  30th,  1916,  in  the  general  fund  as  shown  by  the  balance 
of  your  books? 

Mr.  Reusswig — Yes,  what  we  estimate  as  of  that  date. 

Senator  Bennett — Now,  what  is  included  in  the  next  item — Less  reserve, 
$ — (inaudible)  reappropriation. 


127 


APPROPRIATIONS    IS     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 


Mr.  Reusswig— Such  of  the  current  appropriation  bill — the  one  made  to 
expire — (niaudible)  the  time  between  the — it  would  make  it  impossible  to  pay 
it  out  before  the  first  of  June. 

(IVIr.  Reusswig's  answers  were  dehvered  in  a  xery  low  tone  of  voice  and  most 
of  his  replies  were  very  indistinct.) 

Senator  Bennett— Is  your  present  capital  included  in  that  $ — ? 

Mr.  Reusswig — It  is  not  in  that. 

Senator  Bennett — Then  you  have  a  million  on  deposit  somewhere? 

Mr.  Reusswig — Yes. 

Senator  Bennett — In  what  bank? 

Mr.  Reusswig — (Shakes  his  head.) 

Senator  Simpson — Mr.  President,  may  I  ask  that  the  gentleman  speak 
louder,  so  that  we  can  hear  him? 

(Interruption  bj'  gavel.) 

President  Schoeneck — Conversation  in  the  Chamber  will  please  cease. 

Senator  Bennett — Is  not  your  present  capital  fund  just  Uke  anv  unexpended 
balance  of  appropriation  which  we  reappropriate  and  then  write  the  balance 
on  the  book? 

Mr.  Reusswig — I  cannot  answer  the  question  without  referring  to  our 
sheets. 

Senator  Bennett — Well,  you  don't  know  whether  the  present  capital  fund  of 
twelve  million  dollars  is  in  this  fund  or  not? 

Mr.  Reus.swig — I  could  not  state  it  separately. 

Senator  Bennett — Has  all  of  the  direct  tax  of  last  year  come  in  from  the 
localities? 

Mr.  Ptcusswig — -Xo. 

Senator  Bennett — Has  any  of  it  come  in? 

Mr.  Reusswig — About  one-third. 

Senator  Bennett — When  will  the  balance  of  it  be  paid? 

Mr.  Reusswig — Prior  to  June  30. 

Senator  Bennett — So  that  in  estimating  this  balance,  you  include  the  direct 
tax? 

Mr.  Reusswig — Yes. 

Senator  Bennett — Now,  you  include  in  that  everything  that  is  coming  in 
from  the  balance  of  the  direct  tax? 

Mr.  Reusswig — Yes,  we  do. 

Senator  Bennett — You  remember  last  year  we  imposed  a  direct  tax  of  about 
ten  miUion  for  general  expenses  of  government,  about  nine  and  a  haK  million 
for  sinking  fund? 

Mr.  Reusswig — Yes. 

Senator  Bennett — Nineteen  and  one-half  million  all  together,  practically. 
As  that  money  comes  in,  it  is  all  paid  into  the  general  pot? 

Mr.  Reusswig — Yes. 

Senator  Bermett — So  that  as  this  tax  comes  in,  it  is  all  put  in  the  general  pot? 

Mr.  Reusswig — Yes. 

Senator  Bennett — And  you  estimate  a  balance  of  twelve  million,  one  hundred 
and  fort}'-six  thousand  dollars  by  including  in  that  the  entire  balance  of  direct 
tax  yet  to  come  in? 

Mr.  Reusswig — Yes. 

Senator  Bennett — Now,  if  you  will  turn  to  page  644  of  the  Appropriation 
Bill,  down  at  the  bottom,  you  have  the  highway  sinking  funds,  interest,  §660,- 
000,  ne.xt  to  the  last  item;  amortization,  $155,000.  In  the  Governor's  budget, 
that  amount  is  §1,320,000. 

Mr.  Reus.swig — It  has  been  reduced  to  S660,000,  for  the  reason  that  the 
amount  of  September  1st,  1916,  interest,  has  already  been  covered  by  previous 
appropriation  bills. 

Senator  Bennett — You  have  just  stated  that  as  the  balance  of  direct  tax 
comes  in,  it  will  go  into  the  general  pot;  now,  docs  not  that  payment  of  interest 
on  September  1,  1916,  have  to  come  out  of  this  general  pot,  in  view  of  the  fact 
that  the  entire  balance  of  the  direct  tax  goes  in  there? 

Mr.  Reusswig — It  does  not,  because  the  twelve  million  balance  is  arrived 
at  by  assuming  the  expenditures  up  to  June  30,  and  these  expenditures  assume 
contributions  to  the  sinking  fund. 

128 


MINUTES     OF     THE     SENATE     DEBATE 


Senator  Bennett — Have  you  your  sheet  with  you  showing  that? 

Mr.  Reusswig — I  have  not,  I  am  sorry  to  say.  I  did  not  expect  these  ques- 
tions, so  I  have  not  it  here. 

Senator  Bennett — I  wonder  if  we  could  send  for  that? 

Mr.  Reusswig — Yes. 

Senator  Sage — Mr.  Reusswig  will  send  for  his  sheets  and  have  them  over  here. 

Senator  Walters — Is  the  Senator  from  the  Eighteenth  finished? 

Senator  Bennett — No,  he  is  sending  for  the  sheets. 

Senator  Walters — If  not,  if  the  Senator  has  not  finished,  if  he  will  permit  me, 
I  cannot  let  this  opportunity  go  by  without  saying  something  in  relation  to  the 
action  of  the  Finance  Committee  toward  the  College  of  Forestry  at  Syracuse. 
I  want  the  Senator  to  understand  that  they  are  educating  there  now  some  three 
hundred  students.  It  is  practically  one  of  the  largest  forestry  colleges  now  in 
this  country.  The  economical  ideas  of  our  Finance  Committee  are  reflected 
strongest  in  the  itemizing  of  the  allowances  made  toward  that  self -same  col- 
lege of  Forestry. 

The  special  bill  which  the  Senator  has  seen  here  on  the  calendar,  was  made 
necessary  by  virtue  of  the  decided  use  of  the  pruning  knife  which  he  has  men- 
tioned. There  was  a  deficiency  in  1914-15  of  some  $7,000.  That  item  was 
not  allowed  in  the  appropriation  bill.  The  College  of  Forestry  has  four  ex- 
perimental stations,  one  in  Syracuse,  one  in  Montakene,  the  Adirondacks  and 

one  in .     Now,  unfortunately,  but  in  no  spirit  of  criticism — although  I 

thought  the  Finance  Committee  was  somewhat  niggardly  in  their  allow- 
ances— they  did  not  allow  us  a  single  dollar  for  day  labor  which  was  absolutely 
necessary  to  take  care  of  these  experimental  stations,  and  this  special  bill  in- 
cludes an  item  of  $2,500  for  day  labor.  Now  that  item  for  day  lalaor  goes  even 
further  than  to  take  care  of  the  experimental  stations,  because  we  have  a  build- 
ing completed  and  ready  for  occupancy.  We  will  build  there  a  power  station 
which  I  hope,  and  -which  it  is  represented  to  me,  will  be  completed  on  or  before 
November  1.  Now.  the  economical  streak  of  the  Finance  Committee  resulted 
in  denying  to  us  a  fireman  or  an  engineer.  We  are  provided  with  a  single 
janitor;  no  day  labor;  no  day  labor  money.  I  have  been  asking  the  Finance 
and  Ways  and  Means  Committees  how  they  expected  the  cleaning  of  the  build- 
ing to  be  done,  and  what  they  expected  to  pay,  and  so  I  assume  that  with  this 
$2,500  item  in  this  special  bill,  we  may  be  able  to  get  janitor  service.  I  am 
not  going  into  details,  but  I  can  assure  the  Senator  that  there  has  been  no  evi- 
dence of  extravagance  whatsoever  in  allowances  made  to  the  College  of  For- 
estry, but  on  the  contrary  I  feel  very  justified  in  standing  upon  this  floor  and 
complaining  somewhat  as  to  the  treatment  which  the  College  has  received  at  the 
hands  of  the  Finance  Committee. 

Senator  Sage — I  want  to  saj'-  something  about  this  School  of  Forestry  to  the 
Senator  from  the  Eighteenth :  I  don't  think  the  State  ought  ever  to  have  started 
a  school  of  forestry.  I  think  it  was  a  mistake.  I  don't  think  the  State  ought 
ever  to  have  started  a  school  on  Long  Island,  although  the  Senator  from  that 
district  disagreed  with  me.  But  the  State  has  started  too  many  agricultural 
schools,  and  I  think  too  many  normal  schools.  But  the  Finance  Committees 
of  the  Legislature,  in  case  the  State  has  started  these  schools,  has  got  to  pro- 
vide for  their  maintenance,  and  I  think  the  Senator  from  the  Thirty-eighth 
knows  the  way  he  feels  about  the  way  we  treated  his  forestry  school;  and  that 
will  show  to  you,  and  has  shown  to  you,  that  we  have  cut  the  appropriation 
down  to  a  minimum. 

Senator  Walters — Lower  than  that. 

Senator  Sage — We  have  done  it  as  much  as  we  could  in  all  of  these  institu- 
tions. 

Senator  Bennett — (Inaudible) — consoKdate? 

Senator  Sage — I  might  advocate  it,  but  I  don't  think  I  would  get  away  with 
it. 

All  these  criticisms  are  all  right.  There  is  no  reason  why  a  bill  should  not  be 
criticized,  but  there  are  a  lot  of  people  who  criticize  who  do  not  realize  that  after 
a  State  activity  is  started,  either  1)\'  a  Democratic  or  Republican  administration, 
if  you  start  a  forestry,  an  agricultural  or  a  normal  school,  or  a  hospital,  we  have 
got  to  appropriate  money  for  running  that  hospital  or  school.  We  have  tried 
our  best  to  keep  these  amounts  down  to  the  lowest  minimum. 

129 


APPROPRIATIONS     IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 

One  other  thing  I  would  like  to  say  to  the  Senator  from  the  Eighteenth,  has 
he  ever  visited  the  great  insane  hospitals  of  the  State  of  New  York?  Does  he 
know  that  they  are  practically  cities  in  themselves,  some  of  them;  and  does  he 
know  that  when  he  started  talking  about  a  laundry  for  an  institution,  $30,000 
or  $50,000,  what  it  means  to  build  one  of  these  laundries  and  heating  plants  to 
take  care  of  these  great  communities?  It  is  absolutely  different  from  any 
private  institution.  They  ai-e  enormous  things,  and  I  would  like  to  have  the 
Senator  from  Long  Island  say  just  one  word  about  some  of  these  hospitals,  be- 
cause he  knows  about  them,  and  he  can  tell  the  Senator  what  it  means  in 
building  these  heating  plants  and  laundries,  and  this  Legislature  has  not  appro- 
priated enough  monej'  for  the  hospitals  in  some  j^ears,  and  we  have  got  to  take 
care  of  these  appropriations,  and  the  only  reason  the  appropriation  has  been 
cut  as  low  as  it  has  is  due  to  the  fact  that  the  Wa3's  and  Means  Committee  and 
the  Finance  Committee  both  feel  that  on  account  of  the  enormous  increase  in 
cost  of  t)uilding  materials  this  year,  stone,  brick  and  mortar,  it  would  not  be 
wise  for  the  State  to  appropriate  m.oney  to  build  buildings,  where  the  cost 
was  going  to  be  from  25  per  cent  to  50  per  cent  more  than  it  would  be  in 
an  ordinary  year,  and  therefore  we  have  on  that  ground  alone  practically 
starved  some  of  these  institutions  of  the  buildings  they  actually  need.  And 
I  would  like  to  have  the  Senator  say  one  word  about  the  hospitals,  as  he 
knows  them. 

Senator  G.  L.  Thompson — Mr.  President,  in  connection  with  these  hospi- 
tals, I  might  say,  briefly,  that  on  Long  Island  we  have  perhaps  one  third  of  the 
insane  in  two  vast  institutions,  and  being  quite  familiar  with  the  conditions  in 
these  hospitals,  I  venture  to  say  that  if  the  Senators  themselves  would  visit 
there,  they  would  find  a  condition  of  affairs  which  would  appeal  to  them  in  not 
denying  the  hospitals  these  improvements  which  they  request.  When  you 
take  into  consideration  what  these  new  plants  mean:  It  means  efficiency, 
economy,  with  ten  thousand  insane  in  two  hospitals.  They  require  improve- 
ments every  year  in  order  to  keep  up  the  efficiency  and  no  Senator  has  any 
reason  to  go  home  and  apologize  for  the  appropriation  made  for  these  hospi- 
tals. The  State  of  New  York  itself  should  not  deny  them  any  reasonable 
amount,  and  this  year  the  appropriations  are  small  compared  with  the  neces- 
sities, and  I  wish  I  could  go  home  and  say  to  my  constituents  that  we  had 
appropriated  two  millions  to  take  care  of  the  overcrowding  in  our  insane 
institutions.  It  would  seem  to  me  asinine  policy  on  the  part  of  the  State  to 
quibble  over  half  a  million  or  one  million  to  take  care  of  these  poor  wards  of 
the  State  whom  we  have  got  to  take  care  of,  and  these  improvements  tend 
to  efficiency  and  economy,  and  I  wish  it  might  be  more. 

Senator  i3ennett — I  do  not  wish  to  be  understood  as  taking  the  position  that 
we  should  not  take  care  of  the  helpless.  My  theory-  is  that  these  are  just  the 
people  who  should  receive  the  public  money.  Thomas  Jefferson  said  the  least 
possible  government  is  the  best  government.  The  people,  the  paupers,  the 
insane,  and  the  sick,  should  be  taken  care  of,  but  when  you  come  to  the  middle 
class  peoi)le,  no  man  in  that  class  is  entitled  to  something  from  government 
that  I  do  not  get,  and  if  the  government  cannot  furnish  the  entire  body  what 
it  is  furnishing  to  one  class,  it  is  not  right  to  furnish  it  to  that  one  class,  and  I 
have  my  doubt  whether  the  State  should  appropriate  any  money  for  college 
or  normal  s(;hool  education,  if  limited  only  to  a  small  class.  The  City  of  New 
York  has  no  right  to  appropriate  money  for  toothbrushes  and  ej-e-glasses  for  a 
certain  section  of  the  city,  if  it  does  not  give  them  to  my  children  also;  it  has  no 
right  to  furnish  a  playground  at  157th  Street  and  Amsterdam  Avenue  if  it  can- 
not put  a  playground  on  every  section  of  the  City. 

The  Chair — I'nder  the  rule  of  thirty  m.inutcs,  he  has  but  two  minutes  more. 

Senator  Bennett — Who  raised  the  point  of  order? 

The  Chairman — The  Chair  is  enforcing  the  rule. 

Senator  Bennett — I  ask  unanimous  consent. 

The  Chair — Senator  Bennett  asks  imanimous  consent  to  extend  his  time  be- 
yond the  half  hour. 

Senator  Brown — All  right. 

Senator  Sage — I  would  like  to  ask  the  Senator  from  the  18th  a  question: 
Where  has  he  found  the  toothbrushes  and  eye-glasses  in  tliis  bill? 

The  Chairman — The  (luestion  is  on  the  proposition  of  unanimous  consent. 

130 


MINUTES     OF     THE     SENATE     DEBATE 


Senator  Bennett — I  withdraw  that,  Mr.  Chairman,  and  move  to  reaommit  the 
bill,  and  on  that  motion  I  would  like  to  be  heard. 

The  Chairman — Senator  Bennett  moves  to  recommit  the  bill.  Without 
unanimous  consent  the  Senator  is  entitled  to  discuss  the  motion  for  two  minutes. 

Senator  Bennett — Very  well,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  Brown — Mr.  President,  I  ask  unanimous  consent  for  the  Senator 
from  the  Eighteenth  to  proceed. 

The  Chairman — The  Chair  desires  to  know  what  extension  the  Senator  is  to 
be  granted? 

Senator  Sage — In  view  of  the  fact  that  we  are  waiting  now  for  the  sheets 
from  the  Comptroller's  Office,  I  ask  that  this  be  made  indefinite. 

The  Chairman — Is  there  objection  to  unanimous  consent?  Without  ob- 
jection, the  Senator  will  proceed. 

Senator  Bennett — Now,  the  objection  of  the  presiding  officer  having  been 
removed,  I  will  continue. 

Mr.  President,  I  desire  to  state,  lest  I  should  be  misconstrued,  I  believe  in  the 
fullest  appropriation  for  the  care  of  the  helpless  and  insane  and  the  poor. 

Senator  G.  L.  Thompson — Mr.  President,  v/ill  the  gentleman  give  way  for  a 
question?  If  you  have  no  desire  to  retard  the  progress  of  our  institutions  in 
supplying  them  with  funds,  why  is  it  you  want  to  send  broadcast  throughout 
the  State  the  impression  that  a  laundry  for  some  hospital  or  institution  like 
that,  anj^vhere  in  the  State,  for  the  care  of  the  insane,  is  extravagant?  How 
can  you  square  yourself  with  your  statement? 

Senator  Bennett — Now,  the  Senator  need  not  be  worried  about  what  I  say 
here  being  sent  broadcast  throughout  the  State. 

I  called  attention  to  the  fact  yesterday  that  we  were  exceeding  our  revenues 
by  between  ten  to  twenty  million,  and  I  don't  see  anything  in  the  papers  which 
would  indicate  that  it  was  "sent  broadcast." 

Senator  Thompson — That  was  because  the  Mayor  of  New  York  said  it  could 
be  reduced  by  seven  million,  and  he  got  ahead  of  the  Senator  from  the  Eight- 
eenth. 

Senator  Wagner — Well,  he  is  right. 

Senator  Bennett — Mr.  President,  I  called  attention  to  it  two  or  three  weeks 
ago,  and  the  Mayor  took  my  cue,  and  having  the  benefit  of  high  and  exalted 
position — I  have  often  said,  the  rule  of  nature  obtains,  one  sows  and  the  other 
reaps.  I  have  no  pride  of  authorship,  the  Mayor  of  New  York  followed  the 
example  of  the  Senator  from  the  Thirty-fifth.  I  am  glad  to  have  the  citizens 
of  the  State  obtain  the  benefit.     Now,  I  think  I  have  called  attention  to — 

Senator  Sage — The  sheets  are  here  now. 

Senator  Bennett — Have  you  a  sheet  showing  how  the  two  millions  is  made 
up? 

Mr.  Reusswig — My  answer  was  that  the  surplus  was  arrived  at  by  assuming 
the  expenses  to  June  30th  and  including  contributions  to  the  sinking  fund. 

Senator  Bennett — What  does  that  sheet  show  your  actual  total  aggregate 
bank  balance? 

Mr.  Reusswig — The  estimated  bank  balance  on  that  date  is  $12,000,000. 
In  determining  that,  we  must  estimate  the  revenue  up  to  that  date.  (In- 
audible.) 

(The  Senator  from  the  18th  goes  over  to  Mr.  Reusswig's  side  and  consults 
with  him,  with  the  sheet  before  them.) 

Senator  Bennett — I  have  asked  Mr.  Reusswig  why  the  different  funds,  Nos. 
1,  2  and  3,  of  the  highway  sinking  fund — the  difference  being  that  the  appro- 
priation bill  of  this  year  appropriates  only  interest  for  March,  1917,  and  not  for 
September  1,  1916,  and  so  in  all  the  other  months. 

Mr.  Reusswig — Because  that  interest  is  not  m^ade  until  September,  1917. 
The  appropriation  for  the  current  year  includes  the  interest  for  March,  1916, 
and  September,  1916. 

Senator  Bennett — On  all  funds? 

Mr.  Reusswig— No,  sir;  (inaudible). 

(Some  conversation  between  Senator  Bennett  and  Mr.  Reusswig,  inaudible 
to  the  stenographer.) 

Senator  Bennett — Mr.  Reusswig,  do  you  know  what  the  largest  receipts  for 
stock  transfer  tax  of  any  year  have  been? 

131 


APPROPRIATIONS     IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 

Mr.  Reusswig — I  cannot  say  it  offhand,  but  if  anyone  has  the  Comptroller's 
Report  available — well,  possibly  a  million  dollars.  I  would  hke  to  answer 
your  question  with  reference  to  the  capital  fund  of  the  prisons  that  is  not  in- 
cluded in  the  general  fund  statement  which  you  have  before  you. 

(Some  conversation  between  Senator  Bennett  and  Mr.  Reusswig  and  another 
representative  from  the  Comptroller's  Office,  shaking  of  heads  and  considerable 
dumb  show.) 

Senator  Bennett — And  you  say,  Mr.  Reusswig,  this  milhon  dollars  capital 
fund,  prison  fund,  does  not  exist? 

Mr.  Reusswig — It  is  not  in  the  State  treasury. 

Senator  Bennett — Well,  then,  can  you  turn  to  page  68  (or  38?)  of  this  bill? 
Beginning  537. 

Senator  Sage — Mr.  President,  I  don't  want  the  impression  to  go  abroad  that 
there  is  not  any  such  thing  as  prison  capital  fund,  but  it  is  not  in  the  name  of  the 
State  Treasurer,  it  is  to  the  credit  of  the  Commissions.  It  has  nothing  what- 
soever to  do  with  this  general  appropriation.  In  various  banks.  The  money 
is  actually  there. 

Senator  Bennett — I  think  Mr.  Reusswig  has  answered  all  of  my  questions. 

After  the  Senator  from  the  Sixteenth  gets  through,  I  would  like  about  five 
minutes. 

Senator  Wagner — Mr.  Reusswig,  have  you  the  comparative  figures  of  ap- 
propriations made  to  the  different  departments  between  1914  and  1916? 

Mr.  Reusswig — No. 

Senator  Wagner — You  do  not  make  an  investigation  as  to  whether  the  re- 
quests made  are  reasonable  or  not? 

Mr.  Reusswig — We  tabulate. 

Senator  Wagner — And  the  tabulations — that  is  all,  so  you  could  give  me  no 
information  as  to  whether  a  particular  appropriation  is  necessary,  desirable  or 
extravagant? 

Mr.  Reusswig— Xo. 

Senator  Wagner — Can  you  tell  me  just  what  that  two  miUions  reserve  is 
made  up  of?     How  you  arrive  at  it? 

Mr.  Reusswig — It  is  made  up  on  the  basis  of  the  outstanding  liabilities,  ob- 
ligations incurred,  not  yet  paid,  from  the  treasury. 

(Some  remarks  inaudible.) 

Senator  Sage — I  want  to  explain  that  they  have  taken,  as  he  says,  obliga- 
tions incurred  before  they  are  paid,  and  they  have  merely  taken  that  to  apply 
to  the  end  of  the  fiscal  year.  Of  course  there  are  always  obligations  incurred, 
and  they  have  taken  those — 

Senator  Wagner — Now,  ordinarily-  there  would  lapse  between  June  30th  and 
October  1st,  about  four  milhon  dollars  of  salary  payment,  lapsing  because  of  the 
change  of  the  fiscal  year.  Your  payroll  is  about  sixteen  million  dollars  per 
year? 

Mr.  Reusswig — (Reply  inaudible.) 

Senator  Wagner — On  appropriations  for  administrative  expenses,  is  not  it 
reliable  to  say  that  about  fifty  per  cent  is  for  payment  of  salaries  and  fifty  per 
cent  for  other  administrative  expenses? 

(Both  gentlemen  talking  at  once,  much  of  it  inaudible  to  anybody  but  them- 
selves.) 

Senator  Wagner — So  that  four  millions  of  the  salaries  do  lapse? 

Mr.  Reusswig — No,  no,  sir. 

Senator  Wagner — And  if  the  administrative  expenses  outside  of  salaries  are 
sixteen  million  dollars,  four  million  of  that  would  lapse — 

Mr.  Hcii.sswig — We  have  estimated  nine  million. 

Mr.  Wagner — Let  me  bring  up  the  point. 

So  that  these  two  millions  which  are  being  kept  in  reserve,  are  two  million 
out  of  the  four  millions  that  would  practically  lapse? 

(Reusswig  and  his  assistant,  ]^.Ir.  Boone,  shaking  heads.) 

Senator  Wagner — Well,  you  are  estimating  two  millions  for  expenses  outside 
of  salaries,  two  million  more  for  expense >  outside  of  salaries. 

Mr.  Reusswig — Yes,  eight  or  nine  more  lapse,  are  not  available,  and  the 
two  million  is  a  reserve  in  the  treasury  to  pay  obligations. 

Senator  Wagner — But  there  is  no  particular  time  when  you  need  buy  a  sup- 

132 


MINUTES     OF     THE    SENATE     DEBATE 


ply,  and  if  I  have  got  money  to  purchase  supplies  and  timber,  and  service  and 
other  matters  of  that  kind  which  are  not  regular  as  salaries  are,  even  though 
ordinarily  I  would  expend  it  between  June  30  and  October  1,  I  can  use  that 
money  before  June  30?  You  are  giving  two  millions  of  money  which  under  an 
ordinary  estimate  would  be  spent  after  June  30,  and  this  permits  it  tp  be  spent 
before  June  30,  and  you  are  keeping  a  reserve  of  two  millions  to  meet  it? 
Mr.  Reusswig — No;  I  think  you  have  not  come  to  the  point  yet. 
Senator  Wagner — Every  department  has  knowledge  of  the  fact  that  they 
may,  in  addition  to  their  regular  appropriation,  they  may  spend  two  miUions 
out  of  the  four  millions  which  would  ordinarily  lapse,  figuring  on  an  average 
expenditure  equal  to  the  expenditure  for  salaries,  so  that  if  between  now  and 
June  30th  they  incur  these  obhgations,  they  will  come  out  of  the  two  millions? 

Mr.  Reusswig — We  are  not  assuming  that  any  such  condition  is  going  to  arise. 
Senator  Sage — I  would  like  to  ask  one  question  of  Mr.  Reusswig:  I  made  the 
statement  that  they  always  include  an  item  of  this  kind — 

(Some  nodding  and  shaking  of  heads  and  inaudible  conversation  between 
Senator  Sage  and  the  two  representatives  of  the  Comptroller's  Office.) 

Senator  Simpson — Mr.  President,  may  I  ask,  on  behalf  of  all  of  us  that  the 
gentlemen  speak  so  that  we  may  hear  them  over  here,  and  so  that  the  press  may 
hear? 

Senator  Sage — There  is  no  appropriation  bill  contained  in  this  statement — 
it  is  the  first  time — I  say  it  is  the  custom  of  the  Comptroller's  Office  always 
to  reserve  an  amount  necessary  for  contract  or  expenditures  which  have 
been  incurred  and  for  which  bills  have  not  been  rendered;  and  this  is  what 
this  is  for. 

Mr.  Reusswig— That  is  what  this  particular  item  is  for;  I  cannot  speak  of 
past  experiences. 

Senator  Wagner — It  has  never  been  so  in  the  past. 

President  Schoeneck — When  the  Deputy  Comptroller  addresses  himself,  will 
he  please  speak  a  little  louder? 

Senator  Wagner — I  took  the  pains  to  go  over  some  appropriation  bills  of  the 
past  and  never  could  find  any  such  reservation  made. 

Senator  Bennett — May  I  ask — I  called  attention  to  the  fact  that  the  reap- 
propriations  in  this  bill,  in  the  Canal  Sinking  Fund,  amounted  to  $ — -.  Now 
you  state  you  include  this  in  the  reserve.  Now,  there  is  a  reappropriation  for 
the  Panama  Pacific  Exposition:  Have  you  included  that  in  the  million  dollar 
reserve? 

Mr.  Reusswig — I  stated  that  was  included  in  the  two  million  dollar  reserve — 
(the  rest  of  reply  inaudible.) 

Senator  Bennett — How  about  the  Plattsburg  Commission?  Is  that  an  ob- 
ligation? 

Mr.  Reusswig — The  two  millions  is  estimated  as  obligation  outstanding  on 
June  30th. 

Senator  Bennett — You  have  included  the  obhgation  expended?  There  is  a 
difference  between  obligations  outstanding  and  the  balance  itself. 

Mr.  Reusswig — The  obhgations  may  be  such — this  is  to  take  care  of  obli- 
gations which — included  in  these  items — intended  to  cover  obhgations  out- 
standing. 

Mr.  Bennett — Well,  here  is  the  Plattsburg  Centenary — 

Mr.  Reusswig — I  don't  believe  there  is  any  obligation  outstanding  against 
that.     If  there  is  any  obhgation  outstanding,  it  is  not  included  in  that. 

Senator  Bennett — Wherever  there  is  any  obligation  outstanding,  you  have 
not  included  it  in  your  two  millions? 

Mr.  Reusswig — No. 

Senator  Sage— That  Plattsburg  Centenary  is  for  a  monument,  and  I  sup- 
pose they  have  contracted.     They  have  been  getting  land. 

Senator  Foley — That  obhgation  has  been  incurred;  the  government  a  certain 
amount,  and  the  State  contributes  the  rest.  It  is  an  absolute  obhgation  against 
the  State. 

Senator  Wagner — Just  one  other  question:  There  is  an  excess  in  every  one 
of  our  sinking  funds? 

Mr.  Reusswig — Yes. 

Senator  Wagner — And  in  many  of  them  a  great  deal  more  than  is  necessary 

133 


APPROPRIATIONS     IN     LEGISLATURE,    SESSION     OF     1916 

to  contribute,  for  instance,  this  year,  for  the  payment  of  the  contribution  to 
amortize? 

Mr.  Reusswig — That  is  true  as  to  a  number — as  to  most  of  them. 

Senator  Brown — Provision  has  been  made  for  contribution  for  all  the  sinking 
funds,  according  to  the  Constitution,  on  the  bills  here? 

The  Second  Deputy  Comptroller — Except  numbers  1  and  2.  No.  2  (?) 
has  an  amount  equal  to  the  debt.  No  contribution  necessary — and  Nos.  3  and 
4  have  a  large  excess  over  the  actual — in  the  last  two  or  three  years  no  contribu- 
tion made  to  them.  We  paying  the  interest  out  of  that  and  reducing  the  ex- 
cess.    No.  3,  the  Canal — (conversation  inaudible  to  the  stenographer). 

Senator  Bennett — Mr.  President,  what  further  remarks  I  have  to  make  I  will 
make  on  the  rollcall. 

The  President — The  Clerk  will  read  the  last  section. 

Senator  Brown — An  open  call  of  the  Senate,  Mr.  President. 

President  Schoeneck — It  is  moved  that  we  have  an  open  call  of  the  Senate. 
Those  in  favor  will  say  Aye.     Opposed,  No.     The  motion  is  carried. 

The  doorkeepers  will  close  the  doors  except  for  admission  of  Senators,  and 
the  Sergeant-at-Arms  will  enforce  the  rule. 

RoUcaU  for  absentees. 

During  Rollcall: 

Senator  Bennett — Mr.  President,  I  desire  to  call  attention  to  the  fact — I 
desire  to  state  that  in  my  opinion  the  present  form  of  this  bill  is  an  improvement 
over  the  amendments  we  have  adopted  in  past  biUs  heretofore.  In  the  first 
place,  the  Governor  presented  to  us  a  budget  (remarks  inaudible).  (Inter- 
ruption by  gavel  to  quiet  the  noise  in  the  Chamber.) 

Senator  Bennett — What  was  lacking  in  the  Governor's  suggestion  has  been 
provided  by  the  Committees  on  Ways  and  Means  and  Finance — a  statement  of 
the  revenue  accompanying  it.  We  have  been  able  to  discuss  the  bill  to  a 
greater  extent  than  we  have  been  able  to  discuss  it  before. 

Another  good  feature  is  that  there  has  been  included  in  the  bill  what  hereto- 
fore has  been  put  in  three  or  four  different  biUs,  namely,  the  appropriation  bill, 
the  supply  bill,  reappropriation  and  a  number  of  the  other  separate  bills,  and 
these  bills  are  conveniently  separated,  all  of  which  still  further  enables  this 
body  to  see  what  we  are  voting  for,  what  the  income  in  the  Treasury  is,  before 
we  vote. 

I  therefore  take  pleasure  in  stating  that  this  is  an  improvement  on  anything 
that  has  been  done  since  I  have  become  connected  with  it.  Nevertheless,  I 
desire  to  reiterate  that  I  think  it  is  a  mistake  to  appropriate  more  than  our 
revenue.  It  is  admitted  that  we  are  appropriating  a  great  many  more  million 
than  our  revenue.  It  is  suggested  that  part  of  this  excess  be  made  up  by  in- 
crease in  indirect  taxation.  Of  course,  when  an  increase  is  made  in  indirect 
taxation,  in  order  to  cover  a  deficit,  it  usually  indicates  we  have  made  an  ap- 
propriation that  we  are  afraid — (inaudible;  much  confusion). 

If  we  have  got  to  have  an  increase,  the  issue  should  be  met  squarely  and  a 
direct  tax  imposed.  I  do  not  believe,  however,  that  the  operations  of  govern- 
ment have  increased  so  as  to  make  this  necessary.  Nevertheless,  we  have  to 
appropriate  for  the  expenses  of  government,  and  I  therefore  vote  Aye. 


134 


VITA 

The  writer  of  this  dissertation  was  born  at  Harrisville, 
Indiana,  June  8,  1884.  He  attended  the  De  Pauw  Acad- 
emy at  Greencastle,  Indiana,  in  1903-4,  and  later  De  Pauw 
University,  taking  the  A.B.  degree  in  1909.  In  1910-11  and 
1911-12,  he  attended  Columbia  University,  in  the  former  year 
as  the  Indiana  scholar  and  in  the  latter  year  as  a  University 
scholar.  He  received  the  M.A.  degree  in  1911,  and  in  the  same 
year  shared  with  Mr.  Lewis  Mayers  the  Toppan  prize  in 
Constitutional  Law.  In  January  1912  he  was  co-author,  with 
Prof.  Charles  A.  Beard  of  Columbia  University,  of  the  "State- 
Wide  Documents  on  the  Initiative,  Referendum,  and  Recall," 
published  by  the  Macmillan  Co.  From  1912-15,  he  was  a 
teacher  of  history  in  the  Morris  High  School,  New  York  City, 
and  in  1915-16  a  student  in  the  Training  School  for  Public  Service 
connected  with  the  Bureau  of  Municipal  Research,  New  York 
City,  being  appointed  Assistant  Supervisor  of  Instruction  in  the 
Training  School  for  Public  Service  on  June  15,  1916. 


THE  LIBRARY 

UNIVERSITY  07  CALIFORNIA 

LOS  ANGELES 


THE  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARY 
This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below 


Form  L-& 


605 


Shultz- 

■Tl-ie   hictory  of. 
apprcprietions 


session  of  1916,    N.Y, 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  UBRARY  FACILITY 


AA  000  548  194  0 


HJ 

605 

S56h 


